I need help tracking down a this deadbeat asshole !

[Mandy Smith]

Hello,

I was involved for a time with a man by the name of Michael F.
O'Shaughnessy when I live in Central New York(I lived in Morrisville, NY).
He was very handsome, and a smooth talker, we used to talk alot, and seemed
to have nice times together with me and my aged mother(I came from a single
parent family). Anyway, when he decided to not wear a condom, as expected 9
months later I gave birth to beautiful baby girl. Then that's when the
trouble started, when he found out I was pregnant he became enraged. Then he
got a U-haul (when I was at a friends house) and moved all of his stuff out
on me. My daughter Sarah is 15 years old now, and has not seen ONE RED CENT
of support from her father Mike. I know he has alot of money too. When I
was with him he used to wear the finest clothes, and he worked two jobs, I
saw some of his paychecks and they were always around $700-800.00 a week.
You would think making over a grand a week he could share with my daughter
and I, but no he does nothing ! I have been to family court several times
to try to get him to provide for his daughter. They Judges always rule in my
favor, but then I never get any payments from that jerk Michael F.
O'Shaughnessy.

I will describe how he looks now: He has curly black hair, he is very tall
too(over 6 feet tall), he is a White Man(Irish, but he said he's not ?),
also he told me he was from a place called Massena. That's in Canada I
believe. Anyway, I work myself to the bone, making only about $300.00 a
week, I get food stamps too and partial rental assistance too from the
State. But life is really painful for us, he doesn't care though. As soon as
he made a child, he was off and running. If this is any help, the last place
I heard he was is, Santa Barbara,CA Solvay,NY(possibly staying with a girl
named Valerie) New Orleans, LA & Las Vegas. Thanks for listening to me
gripe. Please respond directly to me on the newsgroup. I don't use my normal
email address here. Thanks do much for your help. And other women here's
some free advice: "STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM MICHAEL FRED O'SHAUGHNESSY " !
It's the best advice I can give any other woman, so he won't ruin your life
too. Take care and thanks ahead of time for any help you can provide.


Thanks,
Mandy S.

[Kari]

Mandy Smith wrote:

> Hello,



You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.

A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
**** the bodies...as Pete would say.

[[email protected]]

Such a damn shame that we women don't have any BC choices, and that he
forced his un-condomed self upon you. Boo-fricking-hoo.

[Storm]

Kari,

Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it aint pretty.

Storm


"Kari" > wrote in message
news:ynXHd.10340$HT6.4245@trnddc04...
> Mandy Smith wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>
>
>
> You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
> to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
> just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.
>
> A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
> to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
> **** the bodies...as Pete would say.

[Bradley]

In article <1106263808.8ec7165ddd12fb42d3dd2345f9e85bb1@terane ws>, says...
>
<snip breeder whining>

It's amazing what you get when you Google keywords like
'free', 'child' and 'support' ain't it?

--
Bradley

"Xanax my ass--I need automatic weapons!" - Mytoysdammit; a.s.c.

[Geoff Miller]

Mandy Smith > writes:

> Anyway, when he decided to not wear a condom, as expected 9 months
> later I gave birth to beautiful baby girl.

"When *he* decided?" Did you not have any input where that decision
was concerned?


> My daughter Sarah is 15 years old now, and has not seen ONE RED CENT
> of support from her father Mike.

Three more years, tops, and it becomes a nonissue. Hell, it seems to
me that after fifteen years, it's a nonissue *now.* Get over it and
move on.



Geoff

--
"Cherry blossoms fall
Ken finds a woman with a
Nice perestroikas."
-- Mark Schnitzius

[The Dave©]

> Geoff Miller wrote:
> > Anyway, when he decided to not wear a condom, as expected 9 months
> > later I gave birth to beautiful baby girl.
>
> "When he decided?" Did you not have any input where that decision
> was concerned?

I especially liked the "as expected" part. If it was so obvious and
expected, why didn't she either insist he wear a condom, do some sort
of birth control herself, or better yet, *not have sex with the guy* to
begin with?!?

--
How come people never say "I gave birth to the ugliest damn kid you
ever saw."?

[Kari]

Storm wrote:

> Kari,
>
> Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it aint pretty.
>


Glad to know I offended you. Proud to be
a meanie. So go off yourself, too.

[Kari]

The Dave© wrote:

>>Geoff Miller wrote:
>>
>>>Anyway, when he decided to not wear a condom, as expected 9 months
>>>later I gave birth to beautiful baby girl.
>>
>>"When he decided?" Did you not have any input where that decision
>>was concerned?
>
>
> I especially liked the "as expected" part. If it was so obvious and
> expected, why didn't she either insist he wear a condom, do some sort
> of birth control herself, or better yet, *not have sex with the guy* to
> begin with?!?



Because BC or just not having sex are just too
haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrdddddddddddd.
YCFD.


Kari

[Casey]

Kari spewed:
> Storm wrote:
> > Kari spewed:
> > > A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
> > > to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
> > > **** the bodies...as Pete would say.
> > >
> > Kari,
> >
> > Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it aint pretty.
>
> Glad to know I offended you. Proud to be
> a meanie. So go off yourself, too.

Please tell me your main newsgroup of interest is the childfree one.
We can only hope that your gene pool has finally reached a dead end.

Or that you're just a troll.


Casey

[Veronique]

Casey wrote:
> Kari spewed:
> > Storm wrote:
> > > Kari spewed:
> > > > A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
> > > > to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
> > > > **** the bodies...as Pete would say.
> > > >
> > > Kari,
> > >
> > > Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it
aint pretty.
> >
> > Glad to know I offended you. Proud to be
> > a meanie. So go off yourself, too.
>
> Please tell me your main newsgroup of interest is the childfree one.
> We can only hope that your gene pool has finally reached a dead end.

>
> Or that you're just a troll.
>
>
> Casey

Now isn't this just what happens when idjits crosspost? The only troll
is the OP who couldn't figure out what that "childfree" and "support"
meant she should have gotten an abortion 15 years ago.
V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep

[Kari]

Veronique wrote:

> Casey wrote:
>
>>Kari spewed:
>>
>>>Storm wrote:
>>>
>>>>Kari spewed:
>>>>
>>>>>A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
>>>>>to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
>>>>>**** the bodies...as Pete would say.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Kari,
>>>>
>>>>Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it
>
> aint pretty.
>
>>>Glad to know I offended you. Proud to be
>>>a meanie. So go off yourself, too.
>>
>>Please tell me your main newsgroup of interest is the childfree one.
>>We can only hope that your gene pool has finally reached a dead end.
>
>
>>Or that you're just a troll.
>>
>>
>>Casey
>
>
> Now isn't this just what happens when idjits crosspost? The only troll
> is the OP who couldn't figure out what that "childfree" and "support"
> meant she should have gotten an abortion 15 years ago.


Let alone used BC to prevent the mistake.

I'll second that motion on the OP being the troll and
being too stupid to know what CF is.

Kari

[V]

"Kari" > wrote in message
news:ynXHd.10340$HT6.4245@trnddc04...
> Mandy Smith wrote:
>
> > Hello,
>
>
>
> You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
> to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
> just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.
>
> A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
> to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
> **** the bodies...as Pete would say.

You are one nasty human being, even if this Pete person said it first.
V

--
"Support bacteria, it's the only culture some people have."

[terrible tommy's Childfree Almanac]

A closed fly gathers no crotch fruit.

Those who try to make thier living on their back often end up on the street.

Drive without the air bag end up in the emergency ward, boink without the
latex bag end up in the maternity ward.




terrible tommy's Almanac
Proud sponser of Dr Quincy Kevorkian and the Institiute for Science.

[Kari]

V wrote:
>>Mandy Smith wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hello,
>>
>>
>>
>>You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
>>to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
>>just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.
>>
>>A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
>>to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
>>**** the bodies...as Pete would say.
>
>
> You are one nasty human being, even if this Pete person said it first.



Thank you. Trolls deserve evry bit of flaming and
biting that is dished out here when they barge in
uninvited.

You can't just barge in here, **** on the rug, then
expect not to be spanked for doing so.

Now, don't you have some kids to ignore?

[Kari]

terrible tommy's Childfree Almanac wrote:

> A closed fly gathers no crotch fruit.
>
> Those who try to make thier living on their back often end up on the street.
>
> Drive without the air bag end up in the emergency ward, boink without the
> latex bag end up in the maternity ward.



I sure am glad I wasn't drinking anything when reading this!

[Storm]

Casey, do you really think someone like her
can interest a guy long enough, to actually have sex and breed with her?

Storm

"Casey" > wrote in message
news:AJZHd.62595$Wo.3699@lakeread08...
>
> Please tell me your main newsgroup of interest is the childfree one.
> We can only hope that your gene pool has finally reached a dead end.
>
> Or that you're just a troll.
>
>
> Casey




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Storm]

Might want to start.
It can only help your disposition....

S

"Kari" > wrote in message
news:Z7_Hd.1319$BL3.1240@trnddc01...
>
>
> I sure am glad I wasn't drinking anything when reading this!




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Kari]

Storm wrote:

> Casey, do you really think someone like her
> can interest a guy long enough, to actually have sex and breed with her?
>



FYI, trolltard, I am too damn smart to make baybees.
Unlike you, I prefer to think with my brain instead of my
uterus. I am also happily married. So write that on a
piece of 200-grit sandpaper and shove it up your ass--
make sure to move your nose over first.



> "Casey" > wrote in message
> news:AJZHd.62595$Wo.3699@lakeread08...
>
>>Please tell me your main newsgroup of interest is the childfree one.
>>We can only hope that your gene pool has finally reached a dead end.
>>
>>Or that you're just a troll.

[Casey]

Kari said
> Storm wrote:
>
> > Might want to start.
> > It can only help your disposition....
>
>
> I don't have to get drunk to improve my disposition, nor
> do I need to force myself into alcoholism to prove my
> adulthood.

In your case, it would be a useless waste of good alcohol.



Casey

[The Dave©]

> Casey wrote:
> Please tell me your main newsgroup of interest is the childfree one.
> We can only hope that your gene pool has finally reached a dead end.
>
> Or that you're just a troll.

The second one gets my vote.

--
"Marriage is a great institution, but I'm not ready for an institution
yet." ~ Mae West

[The Dave©]

> Kari wrote:
> FYI, trolltard, I am too damn smart to make baybees.
> Unlike you, I prefer to think with my brain instead of my
> uterus.

Ahem... isn't the reason you're here because of the fact that you got
pregnant without thinking?

--
"Marriage is a great institution, but I'm not ready for an institution
yet." ~ Mae West

[tom c]

"Kari" > wrote in message
news:2s_Hd.1725$BL3.857@trnddc01...

It looks like you acquired a fan club. Don't forget to print a new BINGO
card.


Tom C

[The Dave©]

> 'Kate wrote:
> Hmmm... lemme think. Michael O'Shaughnessey... nope. I can't say as
> I've ever had the pleasure. Sounds like you can't count on him for
> income and you're going to have to go it alone. Consider career
> counseling (sometimes the community college offers free vocational
> counseilng). 7.50 an hour is a hard way to raise a kid.

What was that line in Animal House? Oh yeah, "Fat, drunk, and stupid
is no way to go thru life".

--
"Marriage is a great institution, but I'm not ready for an institution
yet." ~ Mae West

[DaKitty]

"Veronique" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Casey wrote:
> > Kari spewed:
> > > Storm wrote:
> > > > Kari spewed:
> > > > > A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
> > > > > to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
> > > > > **** the bodies...as Pete would say.
> > > > >
> > > > Kari,
> > > >
> > > > Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it
> aint pretty.
> > >
> > > Glad to know I offended you. Proud to be
> > > a meanie. So go off yourself, too.
> >
> > Please tell me your main newsgroup of interest is the childfree one.
> > We can only hope that your gene pool has finally reached a dead end.
>
> >
> > Or that you're just a troll.
> >
> >
> > Casey
>

> meant she should have gotten an abortion 15 years ago.

Wow, now there's someone fit to be a mother!
[eyeroll]

[Kari]

tom c wrote:
> "Kari" > wrote in message
>


> It looks like you acquired a fan club. Don't forget to print a new BINGO
> card.



I think I do need a new one. The other one is used up.

Too bad the trolls couldn't figure out how to use BC
like we use up our BINGO cards.

Kari

[DaKitty]

"Kari" > wrote in message
news:93_Hd.1215$BL3.13@trnddc01...
> V wrote:
> >>Mandy Smith wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Hello,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
> >>to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
> >>just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.
> >>
> >>A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
> >>to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
> >>**** the bodies...as Pete would say.
> >
> >
> > You are one nasty human being, even if this Pete person said it first.
>
>
>
> Thank you. Trolls deserve evry bit of flaming and
> biting that is dished out here when they barge in
> uninvited.
>
> You can't just barge in here, **** on the rug, then
> expect not to be spanked for doing so.
>
> Now, don't you have some kids to ignore?

You know, you could see a doctor for that nasty condition you've got. I
think he might give you some xanax or similar. Really, it will help.
[DaKitty: thinking she knows exactly why the marriage is childless and
feeling sorry for the husband.]

[DaKitty]

"Kari" > wrote in message
news:Z7_Hd.1319$BL3.1240@trnddc01...
> terrible tommy's Childfree Almanac wrote:
>
> > A closed fly gathers no crotch fruit.
> >
> > Those who try to make thier living on their back often end up on the
street.
> >
> > Drive without the air bag end up in the emergency ward, boink without
the
> > latex bag end up in the maternity ward.
>
>
>
> I sure am glad I wasn't drinking anything when reading this!

Sounds like that is an oddity for you... not drinking.

[DaKitty]

"Kari" > wrote in message
news:5r0Id.18632$c%6.1784@trnddc03...
> tom c wrote:
> > "Kari" > wrote in message
> >
>
>
> > It looks like you acquired a fan club. Don't forget to print a new BINGO
> > card.
>
>
>
> I think I do need a new one. The other one is used up.

I can believe that abut you. You do come across as someone who likes to use
people.
Yea, I do feel bad for the husband.
It's okay, he can always come to our group and get some support... later.

[DaKitty]

"Kari" > wrote in message
news:nFZHd.1097$BL3.1034@trnddc01...
> The Dave© wrote:
>
> >>Geoff Miller wrote:
> >>
> >>>Anyway, when he decided to not wear a condom, as expected 9 months
> >>>later I gave birth to beautiful baby girl.
> >>
> >>"When he decided?" Did you not have any input where that decision
> >>was concerned?
> >
> >
> > I especially liked the "as expected" part. If it was so obvious and
> > expected, why didn't she either insist he wear a condom, do some sort
> > of birth control herself, or better yet, *not have sex with the guy* to
> > begin with?!?
>
>
>
> Because BC or just not having sex are just too
> haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrdddddddddddd.
> YCFD.

personal experience of yours?
The way you're triggered and all over the place, it must be.

[DaKitty]

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
news:1106263808.8ec7165ddd12fb42d3dd2345f9e85bb1@t eranews...
> Hello,
>
> I was involved for a time with a man by the name of Michael F.
> O'Shaughnessy when I live in Central New York(I lived in Morrisville,
NY).
> He was very handsome, and a smooth talker, we used to talk alot, and
seemed
> to have nice times together with me and my aged mother(I came from a
single
> parent family). Anyway, when he decided to not wear a condom, as expected
9
> months later I gave birth to beautiful baby girl. Then that's when the
> trouble started, when he found out I was pregnant he became enraged. Then
he
> got a U-haul (when I was at a friends house) and moved all of his stuff
out
> on me. My daughter Sarah is 15 years old now, and has not seen ONE RED
CENT
> of support from her father Mike. I know he has alot of money too. When I
> was with him he used to wear the finest clothes, and he worked two jobs, I
> saw some of his paychecks and they were always around $700-800.00 a week.
> You would think making over a grand a week he could share with my daughter
> and I, but no he does nothing ! I have been to family court several times
> to try to get him to provide for his daughter. They Judges always rule in
my
> favor, but then I never get any payments from that jerk Michael F.
> O'Shaughnessy.
>
> I will describe how he looks now: He has curly black hair, he is very
tall
> too(over 6 feet tall), he is a White Man(Irish, but he said he's not ?),
> also he told me he was from a place called Massena. That's in Canada I
> believe. Anyway, I work myself to the bone, making only about $300.00 a
> week, I get food stamps too and partial rental assistance too from the
> State. But life is really painful for us, he doesn't care though. As soon
as
> he made a child, he was off and running. If this is any help, the last
place
> I heard he was is, Santa Barbara,CA Solvay,NY(possibly staying with a
girl
> named Valerie) New Orleans, LA & Las Vegas. Thanks for listening to me
> gripe. Please respond directly to me on the newsgroup. I don't use my
normal
> email address here. Thanks do much for your help. And other women here's
> some free advice: "STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM MICHAEL FRED O'SHAUGHNESSY " !
> It's the best advice I can give any other woman, so he won't ruin your
life
> too. Take care and thanks ahead of time for any help you can provide.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Mandy S.
>
Hire a PI or someone to track him down, and take him to court.
That's what people in your predicament do.
And, do some work on yourself too, it will help.

[Terry Austin]

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in
news:1106263808.8ec7165ddd12fb42d3dd2345f9e85bb1@t eranews:

> Hello,
>
> I was involved for a time with a man by the name of Michael F.
> O'Shaughnessy when I live in Central New York(I lived in Morrisville,
> NY). He was very handsome, and a smooth talker, we used to talk alot,
> and seemed to have nice times together with me and my aged mother(I
> came from a single parent family). Anyway, when he decided to not wear
> a condom, as expected 9 months later I gave birth to beautiful baby
> girl.

Then you don't belong here, you golddigging ****.

> Then that's when the trouble started, when he found out I was
> pregnant he became enraged.

Since you most likely deliberately lied to him about being on the pill, in
order to entrap him.

Either way, you don't belong here, you golddigging ****.

Go away.

--
Terry Austin
http://www.hyperbooks.com/
Campaign Cartographer Now Available

[Terry Austin]

"Storm" > wrote in :

> Kari,
>
> Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it aint
> pretty.

Golddigging ****s who oops an innocent man never are. Kari, on the other
hand, may well be a goddess.

--
Terry Austin
http://www.hyperbooks.com/
Campaign Cartographer Now Available

[Kari]

Terry Austin wrote:

> "Storm" > wrote in :
>
>
>>Kari,
>>
>>Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it aint
>>pretty.
>
>
> Golddigging ****s who oops an innocent man never are. Kari, on the other
> hand, may well be a goddess.



Why thanky very much, Terry!

It's true--I don't know anything about oopsing a man
into marriage. Too smart to do such a horrible thing.


Kari

[DaKitty]

"Terry Austin" > wrote in message
. 3.50...
> "Storm" > wrote in :
>
> > Kari,
> >
> > Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it aint
> > pretty.
>
> Golddigging ****s who oops an innocent man never are. Kari, on the other
> hand, may well be a goddess.

*groan*
Right, it required no action on his part to make a baby!
Maybe that's just why feminazis think men are useless.... maybe they're onto
something.
[eyeroll]

[Rorqhual]

"The Dave©" > wrote in message
...
> > Kari wrote:
> > FYI, trolltard, I am too damn smart to make baybees.
> > Unlike you, I prefer to think with my brain instead of my
> > uterus.
>
> Ahem... isn't the reason you're here because of the fact that you got
> pregnant without thinking?
>
Define 'here'. The OP Xposted to asc, presumably on the mistaken asumption
that alt.support.childfree has something to do with chyuhld support.

If you want to avoid disturbing responses, you might do well to edit asc out
of your replies.

You might also want to check which froups you are Xposting to before you
make silly assumptions, but that's entirely up to you

HAND
R

[Terry Austin]

Kari > wrote in
news:LF0Id.18634$c%6.312@trnddc03:

> Terry Austin wrote:
>
>> "Storm" > wrote in :
>>
>>
>>>Kari,
>>>
>>>Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it aint
>>>pretty.
>>
>>
>> Golddigging ****s who oops an innocent man never are. Kari, on the
>> other hand, may well be a goddess.
>
>
>
> Why thanky very much, Terry!

I don't suppose you happen to be an 18 year old redheaded stripper with
loose morals and a huge trust fund?
>
> It's true--I don't know anything about oopsing a man
> into marriage. Too smart to do such a horrible thing.
>
>
That's dangerously close to damning yourself with faint praise. I mean,
it's like like it's rocket science.

--
Terry Austin
http://www.hyperbooks.com/
Campaign Cartographer Now Available

[Terry Austin]

"DaKitty" > wrote in
news:fH0Id.7807$Nu.3514@fed1read04:

>
> "Terry Austin" > wrote in message
> . 3.50...
>> "Storm" > wrote in :
>>
>> > Kari,
>> >
>> > Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it
>> > aint pretty.
>>
>> Golddigging ****s who oops an innocent man never are. Kari, on the
>> other hand, may well be a goddess.
>
> *groan*
> Right, it required no action on his part to make a baby!

If she lied about being on birth control - and she probably did - he's not
at fault beyond getting involved with a golddigging ****.

> Maybe that's just why feminazis think men are useless.... maybe
> they're onto something.
> [eyeroll]
>
You're certainly useless, except perhaps as an example. A bad example.

--
Terry Austin
http://www.hyperbooks.com/
Campaign Cartographer Now Available

[Terry Lomax]

Xposts are bad, but the only people who'd be upset on the other groups
are those who deserve to be upset.

Mandy Smith wrote:

[snip libellous stalking]

> He was very handsome, and a smooth talker, we used to talk alot, and
seemed
^^^^
Typical of a parastic white trash mother to fail in grammar.

> to have nice times together with me and my aged mother(I came from a
single
> parent family).

The daughter like the mother, an endless cycle of *******ized children,
slut women who get themselves pregnant, then try to exploit the man
they raped/oopsed for so-called "child support" which they spend on
themselves (usually on drugs, fancy nail jobs, designer clothes, etc).

> months later I gave birth to beautiful baby girl.

If you gave birth to her, she must be ugly.

> trouble started, when he found out I was pregnant he became enraged.
Then he

Right on! You're lucky he didn't kill you.

> My daughter Sarah is 15 years old now, and has
probably tried to have sex with every guy at her school, and has
probably offered herself to various older men who turned her down.

Sarah should be spayed to end the cycle of welfare queens. Growing up
in a fatherless household, she'll try to get herself pregnant out of
wedlock just like her mother, her grandmother, her great-grandmother,
etc. Spaying or death is the only way out.

> I know he has alot of money too. When I
^^^^
> with my daughter and I
^
Gold-digging whore who fails in grammar!

> week, I get food stamps too and partial rental assistance too from
the
> State.

Parasitic whore! YOU'RE the deadbeat a-hole! The tax dollars of the
working poor in your state pay for you to sit on your fat white ass,
pop out babies, and watch Oprah. There should be a rule that anyone
who accepts welfare, food stamps, etc, should be forced to take birth
control so they cannot have any more kids.

The handouts you receive are socialism at its worst. I believe in the
opposite ideology of socialism: euthanasia, which in this case means
removal of unproductive members of society who choose to steal handouts
from productive members.

If this gentleman kills you, perhaps some readers can testify in his
defense.

[Andre Lieven]

Terry Austin ) writes:
> "DaKitty" > wrote in
> news:fH0Id.7807$Nu.3514@fed1read04:
>
>> "Terry Austin" > wrote in message
>> . 3.50...
>>> "Storm" > wrote in :
>>>
>>> > Kari,
>>> >
>>> > Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it
>>> > aint pretty.
>>>
>>> Golddigging ****s who oops an innocent man never are. Kari, on the
>>> other hand, may well be a goddess.
>>
>> *groan*
>> Right, it required no action on his part to make a baby!
>
> If she lied about being on birth control - and she probably did - he's
> not at fault beyond getting involved with a golddigging ****.

Indeed. Lets consider both sides of this issye, which will show why the
sexist cat's claim is false.

Responsibility legally has to follow authority. If I buy a car, unless
you and I have a contract, you cannot be made to pay for it. One night
of your driving it, doesn't make that contract.

Now, as to post coital situations: Women, and women, only, are granted
a variety of methods, some medical or biological, and some *not*, to
void any result of a night's coupling. Said methods are solely at the
discretion of the woman, and the man has AbZero legal authority with
which to either make her use any of those, if she doesn't wish to, or
authority to prevent her from using whichever she chooses, if she
chooses to.

So, if one is to be legally consistant with basic contract law, one
cannot claim that the man is responsible for what the women has at her
sole power to void.

Google up " C4M ", aka " Choice For Men ", which covers all this is
far more detail than a Usenet post can.

>> Maybe that's just why feminazis think men are useless.... maybe
>> they're onto something.
>> [eyeroll]
>>
> You're certainly useless, except perhaps as an example. A bad example.

Quite: A misandrous example.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

[Ezzy]

1. You're a troll. Go away.
2. Your attempt to make yourself a blameless martyr is amusing, clumsy
and pathetic. I see why you are stuck in a dead end job. If you want
more money why not join the sex trade? You seem to be extremely
qualified.
3. Defaming someone and posting personal identifying information about
them without their permission or knowledge is illegal in many places.
Should someone happen to find this person, I hope they remind him of
this opportunity to pursue legal charges or sue you.
4. You have choices regarding birth control. Your choice was not to
use any. After becoming infected... I mean pregnant, you also had
choices regarding the pregnancy. You chose to keep it. His choice was
to get the hell away from you as fast as he could. After reading this,
who could blame him?
5. it's been 15 years. Get over it.
6. You are extremely preoccupied with the sperm donor's money. You
seem to have this bizarre idea that he owes YOU. News flash moo-ho, he
paid for the sex already and any future cash that does come from him is
for child care, not moocow vacation funding.
7. Though last.. it is most important. This is a group dedicated to
those who are FREE from children and happy to be so. Being the self
centered, brain dead **** that you are, you cross posted to a totally
unrelated group.
Please, go **** yourself with a chainsaw real soon.

Ezzy

[tom c]

"DaKitty" > wrote in message
news:gw0Id.7802$Nu.59@fed1read04...
>
>> I can believe that abut you. You do come across as someone who likes to
>> use
> people.

Just like the original poster, used him for cash, used him as an unwanted
sperm donor and wants to use a childfree newsgroup to do her homework.

> Yea, I do feel bad for the husband.
> It's okay, he can always come to our group and get some support... later.


Looking to husband steal?

Tom C

[Tsorton]

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 08:39:26 -0800, "tom c"
> wrote:

>
>"DaKitty" > wrote in message
>news:gw0Id.7802$Nu.59@fed1read04...
>>
>>> I can believe that abut you. You do come across as someone who likes to
>>> use
>> people.
>
>Just like the original poster, used him for cash, used him as an unwanted
>sperm donor and wants to use a childfree newsgroup to do her homework.
>
>> Yea, I do feel bad for the husband.
>> It's okay, he can always come to our group and get some support... later.
>
>
>Looking to husband steal?
>
>Tom C
>

/snork

Nah, what decent guy would go for a stretched out ****, prolapsed
uterus, udder hanging up to her knees and pair of crotchfuit thrown in
to make entire package 'simply irresistible'?

Madia, wondering why Da****ly took Kari's post so personal....

[Kari]

Tsorton wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 08:39:26 -0800, "tom c"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>"DaKitty" > wrote in message
>>news:gw0Id.7802$Nu.59@fed1read04...
>>
>>>>I can believe that abut you. You do come across as someone who likes to
>>>>use
>>>
>>>people.
>>
>>Just like the original poster, used him for cash, used him as an unwanted
>>sperm donor and wants to use a childfree newsgroup to do her homework.
>>
>>
>>>Yea, I do feel bad for the husband.
>>>It's okay, he can always come to our group and get some support... later.
>>
>>
>>Looking to husband steal?
>>
>>Tom C
>>
>
>
> /snork
>
> Nah, what decent guy would go for a stretched out ****, prolapsed
> uterus, udder hanging up to her knees and pair of crotchfuit thrown in
> to make entire package 'simply irresistible'?



That would surely gross out DH. Plus, I don't think he
would be too turned on by this knuckle-dragging cave dweller
troll.


>
> Madia, wondering why Da****ly took Kari's post so personal....



Breeders always take things personal when a CFer shows
them a different point of view. :)



Kari


--
Kari Levstik

[The Dave©]

> Rorqhual wrote:
> > Ahem... isn't the reason you're here because of the fact that you
> > got pregnant without thinking?
> >
> Define 'here'. The OP Xposted to asc, presumably on the mistaken
> asumption that alt.support.childfree has something to do with chyuhld
> support.
>
> If you want to avoid disturbing responses, you might do well to edit
> asc out of your replies.
>
> You might also want to check which froups you are Xposting to before
> you make silly assumptions, but that's entirely up to you

Several points:

"Here" is where she posted and where I read it.

Crossposting doesn't concern me, but if you must know, I did know that
it was crossposted to ASC and didn't care one whit. I would agree that
posting to ASC was not really relevant, but it's not nearly as far off
as people posting abortion topics on a model train group, for example.

It's amusing that the people in ASC insist on exhibiting child-like
behavior such as purposely misspelling words like "child", "parent",
etc. If you want to be seen as a mature adults, act like it. Show
some personal dignity.

--
It has been determined that research causes cancer in lab rats.

[Ezzy]

Once again .. bad choices caused the problem and those responsible are
trying to blame others.... hmmm I see a pattern.

ezzy

[.]

"Kari" > wrote in message
news:93_Hd.1215$BL3.13@trnddc01...
> V wrote:
> >>Mandy Smith wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Hello,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
> >>to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
> >>just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.
> >>
> >>A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
> >>to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
> >>**** the bodies...as Pete would say.
> >
> >
> > You are one nasty human being, even if this Pete person said it first.
>
>
>
> Thank you. Trolls deserve evry bit of flaming and
> biting that is dished out here when they barge in
> uninvited.
>
> You can't just barge in here, **** on the rug, then
> expect not to be spanked for doing so.
>
> Now, don't you have some kids to ignore?

I wonder what the ladies at your Bible Study group would say about your
behavior, Kari.

[Mandy Smith]

Kari, you don't know me first of all, secondly I'm not a breeder. I only
have one child, you probably have none. Is this the way you treat someone
that needs help ? You have a very cold, evil, and dark soul, I recommend
professional help for your lack of humanity.






"Kari" > wrote in message
news:ynXHd.10340$HT6.4245@trnddc04...
> Mandy Smith wrote:
>
> > Hello,
>
>
>
> You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
> to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
> just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.
>
> A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
> to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
> **** the bodies...as Pete would say.

[Mandy Smith]

Alot of the people on here are terribly mean, I wish there were more kind
hearted people around. It makes me feel very ashamed of my fellow Americans.







"Storm" > wrote in message ...
> Kari,
>
> Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it aint
pretty.
>
> Storm
>
>
> "Kari" > wrote in message
> news:ynXHd.10340$HT6.4245@trnddc04...
> > Mandy Smith wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >
> >
> >
> > You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
> > to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
> > just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.
> >
> > A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
> > to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
> > **** the bodies...as Pete would say.
>
>

[P.Fritz]

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
news:1106334344.ab33067d2cdf8cd6e07b6fc68ab1af45@t eranews...
> Alot of the people on here are terribly mean, I wish there were more kind
> hearted people around. It makes me feel very ashamed of my fellow
> Americans.


I'm ashamed there are money grubbing irresponsible morons like you out there
having/raising kids

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Storm" > wrote in message ...
>> Kari,
>>
>> Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it aint
> pretty.
>>
>> Storm
>>
>>
>> "Kari" > wrote in message
>> news:ynXHd.10340$HT6.4245@trnddc04...
>> > Mandy Smith wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hello,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
>> > to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
>> > just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.
>> >
>> > A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
>> > to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
>> > **** the bodies...as Pete would say.
>>
>>
>
>

[Jason G]

In article <1106333839.1ad627b27a591591c0f99116ffbc7a34@terane ws>, Mandy Smith
says...
>
>Kari, you don't know me first of all, secondly I'm not a breeder. I only
>have one child, you probably have none. Is this the way you treat someone
>that needs help ?

No, but its the way we treat stupid-ass single-mother sluts too dumb to use
birth control or abort.

Let me guess, you think abortion is wrong. But fornication is just okey-dokey
with Jeezus. How many other guys have hit it and quit it with you?

Stupid slut. I'm sure with your horrible example, your ******* daughter will be
pregnant very soon.


--
Jason G
"This isn't a matter of being tolerant;
it's a matter of being sane." --REP, a.s.c.

[Stephanie Stowe]

"The Dave©" > wrote in message
...
> > Kari wrote:
> > FYI, trolltard, I am too damn smart to make baybees.
> > Unlike you, I prefer to think with my brain instead of my
> > uterus.
>
> Ahem... isn't the reason you're here because of the fact that you got
> pregnant without thinking?
>

She is not the OP.

> --
> "Marriage is a great institution, but I'm not ready for an institution
> yet." ~ Mae West

[Kari]

.. wrote:
> "Kari" > wrote in message
> news:93_Hd.1215$BL3.13@trnddc01...
>
>>V wrote:
>>
>>>>Mandy Smith wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
>>>>to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
>>>>just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.
>>>>
>>>>A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
>>>>to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
>>>>**** the bodies...as Pete would say.
>>>
>>>
>>>You are one nasty human being, even if this Pete person said it first.
>>
>>
>>
>>Thank you. Trolls deserve evry bit of flaming and
>>biting that is dished out here when they barge in
>>uninvited.
>>
>>You can't just barge in here, **** on the rug, then
>>expect not to be spanked for doing so.
>>
>>Now, don't you have some kids to ignore?
>
>
> I wonder what the ladies at your Bible Study group would say about your
> behavior, Kari.



I don't go to no silly babble study group. I'm way
smarter than that. Snd since when did your silly
imaginary friend die and appoint you as my judge?

[Kari]

Mandy Smith wrote:

> Kari, you don't know me first of all,



Typical crybaby copout--"you don't know me". Is there
some law that says that I have to know something about
you in order to see that you CHOSE to make an illegitimate
child?


secondly I'm not a breeder.


Yes, you are. You made a mistake and now are looking for
a walking wallet to clean up your mess. It sounds like
the taxpayers already gave you plenty of handouts. And
you are proud of that?


I only
> have one child, you probably have none. Is this the way you treat someone
> that needs help ?



Need help my ass!!!!!!!!!!!! Yeah I don't have any kids.
But guess what? ALL the financial aid for colleges are
geared toward irresponsible idiots like you who can't
be bothered with BC. The financial aid office had the
chutzpah to tell me that I'd have to go out and get
knocked up just to get any financial aid.


You have a very cold, evil, and dark soul, I recommend
> professional help for your lack of humanity.


Yeah, the breeders' answer to everything. Medicate anyone who
disagrees with them. Even Ritalin has become the lazy breeders'
answer for child-rearing.

Just remember, no one took your hand and made you barge in here.

Now, don't you have a kid to ignore?

[The Dave©]

> Stephanie Stowe wrote:
> She is not the OP.

Damn, you're right. I stand corrected.

--
It has been determined that research causes cancer in lab rats.

[Kari]

Jason G wrote:

> In article <1106333839.1ad627b27a591591c0f99116ffbc7a34@terane ws>, Mandy Smith
> says...
>
>>Kari, you don't know me first of all, secondly I'm not a breeder. I only
>>have one child, you probably have none. Is this the way you treat someone
>>that needs help ?
>
>
> No, but its the way we treat stupid-ass single-mother sluts too dumb to use
> birth control or abort.
>
> Let me guess, you think abortion is wrong. But fornication is just okey-dokey
> with Jeezus. How many other guys have hit it and quit it with you?
>
> Stupid slut. I'm sure with your horrible example, your ******* daughter will be
> pregnant very soon.



I'll second the hell out of this!!! You took the
words right out of my mouth.

[V]

"Kari" > spewed
>
> Thank you. Trolls deserve evry bit of flaming and
> biting that is dished out here when they barge in
> uninvited.
>
> You can't just barge in here, **** on the rug, then
> expect not to be spanked for doing so.

Crossposting is not barging. It was posted in our group as well.

>
> Now, don't you have some kids to ignore?

Just as mommy isolated you from her love? Uhm, no.

I did not "barge" in anywhere....you abortive, muculent cur.
Now run along to your therapy appointment to talk about your problems that
stemmed from a bad childhood.
V
--
"If we do not maintain justice, justice will not maintain us."
-Francis Bacon, Sr.

[V]

"DaKitty" > wrote in message
news:Dr0Id.7797$Nu.4768@fed1read04...
>
> "Kari" > wrote in message
> news:93_Hd.1215$BL3.13@trnddc01...
> > V wrote:
> > >>Mandy Smith wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>Hello,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
> > >>to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
> > >>just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.
> > >>
> > >>A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
> > >>to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
> > >>**** the bodies...as Pete would say.
> > >
> > >
> > > You are one nasty human being, even if this Pete person said it first.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thank you. Trolls deserve evry bit of flaming and
> > biting that is dished out here when they barge in
> > uninvited.
> >
> > You can't just barge in here, **** on the rug, then
> > expect not to be spanked for doing so.
> >
> > Now, don't you have some kids to ignore?
>
> You know, you could see a doctor for that nasty condition you've got. I
> think he might give you some xanax or similar. Really, it will help.
> [DaKitty: thinking she knows exactly why the marriage is childless and
> feeling sorry for the husband.]
>
>

Ice is coming to mind.
V

--
"I have learned silence from the talkative; tolerance from the intolerant
and kindness from the unkind. I should not be ungrateful to those teachers"
Kahilil Gibran

[V]

"'Kate" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 20:10:12 GMT, Kari >
> wrote:
>
>
> >I don't go to no silly babble study group. I'm way
> >smarter than that. Snd since when did your silly
> >imaginary friend die and appoint you as my judge?
>
> What a silly little girl.
>
> 'Kate
>

11th grade do you think, Kate? I am thinking more like 9th.....
V

--
Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to
realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.
-- Ronald Reagan

[V]

"Jason G" > wrote in message
...
> In article <1106333839.1ad627b27a591591c0f99116ffbc7a34@terane ws>, Mandy
Smith
> says...
> >
> >Kari, you don't know me first of all, secondly I'm not a breeder. I only
> >have one child, you probably have none. Is this the way you treat someone
> >that needs help ?
>
> No, but its the way we treat stupid-ass single-mother sluts too dumb to use
> birth control or abort.
>
> Let me guess, you think abortion is wrong. But fornication is just
okey-dokey
> with Jeezus. How many other guys have hit it and quit it with you?
>
> Stupid slut. I'm sure with your horrible example, your ******* daughter
will be
> pregnant very soon.
>
>
> --
> Jason G
> "This isn't a matter of being tolerant;
> it's a matter of being sane." --REP, a.s.c.

Jason does not get to "hit" anything often.
V

--
"One way to stop a runaway horse is to bet on him."
Jeffrey Bernard.

[V]

"Kari" > wrote in message
news:VrdId.18671$c%6.6202@trnddc03...
> Mandy Smith wrote:
>
> > Kari, you don't know me first of all,
>
>
>
> Typical crybaby copout--"you don't know me". Is there
> some law that says that I have to know something about
> you in order to see that you CHOSE to make an illegitimate
> child?
>
>
> secondly I'm not a breeder.
>
>
> Yes, you are. You made a mistake and now are looking for
> a walking wallet to clean up your mess. It sounds like
> the taxpayers already gave you plenty of handouts. And
> you are proud of that?
>
>
> I only
> > have one child, you probably have none. Is this the way you treat someone
> > that needs help ?
>
>
>
> Need help my ass!!!!!!!!!!!! Yeah I don't have any kids.
> But guess what? ALL the financial aid for colleges are
> geared toward irresponsible idiots like you who can't
> be bothered with BC. The financial aid office had the
> chutzpah to tell me that I'd have to go out and get
> knocked up just to get any financial aid.
>
>
> You have a very cold, evil, and dark soul, I recommend
> > professional help for your lack of humanity.
>
>
> Yeah, the breeders' answer to everything. Medicate anyone who
> disagrees with them. Even Ritalin has become the lazy breeders'
> answer for child-rearing.
>
> Just remember, no one took your hand and made you barge in here.
>
> Now, don't you have a kid to ignore?
>

Oh, I see the problem, Kari is all mad about financial aid not assisting her.
Gee, I thought it was all about the bad childhood.
Tsk.
V

--
"Black as the devil, hot as hell, pure as an angel, sweet as love."
Charles Maurice de Talleyrand 1754-1838 speaking of the perfect cup of coffee.

[teachrmama]

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
news:1106334344.ab33067d2cdf8cd6e07b6fc68ab1af45@t eranews...
> Alot of the people on here are terribly mean, I wish there were more kind
> hearted people around. It makes me feel very ashamed of my fellow
> Americans.

What would the kind hearted people do, Mandy? Agree that you deserved lots
of money for bringing a child into the world that you couldn't afford to
take care of, and chosing to raise her anyway? O have a few questions for
you:

What have you done, in all thes last 15 years, to make this man a part of
your daughter's life? (Besides seeking child support, that is) Have you
sent photos and letters describing her life and activities? Have you
offered to share custody with him? Have you told him that you will forego
the money--that you just want your daughter to have a loving, nurturing
relationship with her father? What have you done that might help him want
to be part of her life? After all, a relationship with her father is more
important than money, isn't it?

You mention in your original post that you have been to court several times.
Why several? Has a paternity test ever been done? Do you have a court
order for child support? If so, why did you need to go back to court
several times? Has he *ever* been served with papers that declasre him to
be the father and stipulate an amount to be paid? Does he know where you
are, or were you just a passing lust interest? Have you even spoken to him
since your daughterwas born?

[teachrmama]

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
news:1106333839.1ad627b27a591591c0f99116ffbc7a34@t eranews...
> Kari, you don't know me first of all, secondly I'm not a breeder. I only
> have one child, you probably have none. Is this the way you treat someone
> that needs help ? You have a very cold, evil, and dark soul, I recommend
> professional help for your lack of humanity.

It doesn't sound as if you are looking for help, Mandy. It sounds as if you
are looking for money. So, what have you done these last 15 years in the
way of training, etc, to better you lot in life? Have you attended college
to get a degree? Gone to a trade or professional training school? People on
government assistance, as you seem to be, get all kinds of help getting into
training programs. Maybe, instead of looking for the pot of gold at the end
of the Michael F. O'Shaughnessy rainbow, you would be better off finding
ways to increase your employability. And that would be an excellent example
for your daughter, too.

[LOA]

"Kari" > wrote in message
news:PlbId.3563$BL3.1954@trnddc01...
> Tsorton wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 08:39:26 -0800, "tom c"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"DaKitty" > wrote in message
>>>news:gw0Id.7802$Nu.59@fed1read04...
>>>
>>>>>I can believe that abut you. You do come across as someone who likes to
>>>>>use
>>>>
>>>>people.
>>>
>>>Just like the original poster, used him for cash, used him as an unwanted
>>>sperm donor and wants to use a childfree newsgroup to do her homework.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Yea, I do feel bad for the husband.
>>>>It's okay, he can always come to our group and get some support...
>>>>later.
>>>
>>>
>>>Looking to husband steal?
>>>
>>>Tom C
>>
>>
>> /snork
>>
>> Nah, what decent guy would go for a stretched out ****, prolapsed
>> uterus, udder hanging up to her knees and pair of crotchfuit thrown in
>> to make entire package 'simply irresistible'?
>
>
>
> That would surely gross out DH. Plus, I don't think he
> would be too turned on by this knuckle-dragging cave dweller
> troll.
>
>
>>
>> Madia, wondering why Da****ly took Kari's post so personal....
>
>
>
> Breeders always take things personal when a CFer shows
> them a different point of view. :)
>
>
>
> Kari
>
>
> --
> Kari Levstik
>

Too bad your parent's bred.......and what the hell's a "CF"? **** Farter?

[[email protected]]

Mandy Smith wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was involved for a time with a man by the name of Michael F.
> O'Shaughnessy when I live in Central New York(I lived in
Morrisville, NY).
> He was very handsome, and a smooth talker, we used to talk alot, and
seemed
> to have nice times together with me and my aged mother(I came from a
single
> parent family). Anyway, when he decided to not wear a condom, as
expected 9
> months later I gave birth to beautiful baby girl. Then that's when
the
> trouble started, when he found out I was pregnant he became enraged.
Then he
> got a U-haul (when I was at a friends house) and moved all of his
stuff out
> on me. My daughter Sarah is 15 years old now, and has not seen ONE
RED CENT
> of support from her father Mike. I know he has alot of money too.
When I
> was with him he used to wear the finest clothes, and he worked two
jobs, I
> saw some of his paychecks and they were always around $700-800.00 a
week.
> You would think making over a grand a week he could share with my
daughter
> and I, but no he does nothing ! I have been to family court several
times
> to try to get him to provide for his daughter. They Judges always
rule in my
> favor, but then I never get any payments from that jerk Michael F.
> O'Shaughnessy.
>
> I will describe how he looks now: He has curly black hair, he is
very tall
> too(over 6 feet tall), he is a White Man(Irish, but he said he's not
?),
> also he told me he was from a place called Massena. That's in Canada
I
> believe. Anyway, I work myself to the bone, making only about
$300.00 a
> week, I get food stamps too and partial rental assistance too from
the
> State. But life is really painful for us, he doesn't care though. As
soon as
> he made a child, he was off and running. If this is any help, the
last place
> I heard he was is, Santa Barbara,CA Solvay,NY(possibly staying with
a girl
> named Valerie) New Orleans, LA & Las Vegas. Thanks for listening to
me
> gripe. Please respond directly to me on the newsgroup. I don't use my
normal
> email address here. Thanks do much for your help. And other women
here's
> some free advice: "STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM MICHAEL FRED
O'SHAUGHNESSY " !
> It's the best advice I can give any other woman, so he won't ruin
your life
> too. Take care and thanks ahead of time for any help you can
provide.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Mandy S.

What's really amazing is how you went from giving "birth to a beautiful
baby girl", to complaining about having your life ruined...all in two
paragraphs.

If you switched emotions on Michael Fred O'Shaugnessy the way you
switch them in you email, no wonder he "dined-and-dashed your
schizophrenic ass."

[The Dave©]

> teachrmama wrote:
> After all, a relationship with her father is more important than
> money, isn't it?

What a ridiculous notion! Oh, no, money is the *only* factor in
raising happy and healthy kids. The government tells us so all the
time, and we know the government wouldn't lie to us.

--
It has been determined that research causes cancer in lab rats.

[The Dave©]

> wrote:
> What's really amazing is how you went from giving "birth to a
> beautiful baby girl", to complaining about having your life
> ruined...all in two paragraphs.

Good call.

[[email protected]]

In
Message-ID:<1106263808.8ec7165ddd12fb42d3dd2345f9e85bb1@terane ws>
posted on Thu, 20 Jan 2005 18:29:28 -0500, Mandy Smith
wrote:

>Hello,
>
> I was involved for a time with a man by the name of Michael F.
>O'Shaughnessy when I live in Central New York(I lived in Morrisville, NY).
>He was very handsome, and a smooth talker, we used to talk alot, and seemed
>to have nice times together with me and my aged mother(I came from a single
>parent family).
Um, well for a start, do you know that is actually his real
name? Do you have anything like positive ID on him?
Drivers license number, passport number, credit card
numbers, photos, and so on?

The fact that he was "handsome" and a "smooth talker" means
nothing. Most con men are. Most psychopaths are.
Otherwise neither would be successful.

>Anyway, when he decided to not wear a condom, as expected 9
>months later I gave birth to beautiful baby girl.

Not only his decision, you obviously agreed to it. And for
that matter, what kept you from using a diaphragm, taking
oral contraceptives, or using other birth control methods.

For that matter, once you found you were pregnant, what was
to stop you having an abortion?

> Then that's when the
>trouble started, when he found out I was pregnant he became enraged. Then he
>got a U-haul (when I was at a friends house) and moved all of his stuff out
>on me. My daughter Sarah is 15 years old now, and has not seen ONE RED CENT
>of support from her father Mike.

When he ran away when he found you were pregnant, what else
did you expect?

> I know he has alot of money too. When I
>was with him he used to wear the finest clothes, and he worked two jobs, I
>saw some of his paychecks and they were always around $700-800.00 a week.
>You would think making over a grand a week he could share with my daughter
>and I, but no he does nothing ! I have been to family court several times
>to try to get him to provide for his daughter. They Judges always rule in my
>favor, but then I never get any payments from that jerk Michael F.
>O'Shaughnessy.

Perhaps your state [or country] didn't try hard enough to
track him at the time. Even 15 years ago it wouldn't have
been all that easy to disappear from the USA if you had the
means to promptly track him.
>
>I will describe how he looks now: He has curly black hair, he is very tall
>too(over 6 feet tall), he is a White Man(Irish, but he said he's not ?),
>also he told me he was from a place called Massena. That's in Canada I
>believe.

Sounds more like Austria or Italy to me.

>Anyway, I work myself to the bone, making only about $300.00 a
>week, I get food stamps too and partial rental assistance too from the
>State. But life is really painful for us, he doesn't care though. As soon as
>he made a child, he was off and running. If this is any help, the last place
>I heard he was is, Santa Barbara,CA Solvay,NY(possibly staying with a girl
>named Valerie) New Orleans, LA & Las Vegas. Thanks for listening to me
>gripe. Please respond directly to me on the newsgroup. I don't use my normal
>email address here. Thanks do much for your help. And other women here's
>some free advice: "STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM MICHAEL FRED O'SHAUGHNESSY " !
>It's the best advice I can give any other woman, so he won't ruin your life
>too. Take care and thanks ahead of time for any help you can provide.

Um, am not sure that any of us can help much Mandy. 15
years is a long time ago if you have no more information
than you have given us so far.

Didn't it ever occur to you to try to verify his identity
before you trusted him that much? If he had a car, in many
states at that time it wouldn't have been that difficult to
get a look at the registration certificate or check out the
license plate number? Or get a look at his social security
number?

Yeah, I know that some people such as >
might consider me and others on alt.support.childfree, might
consider us excessively suspicious, but I wouldn't let him
or anyone else even into my house unless had some sort of a
track on them.

Identity fraud is far too easy, especially these days.

Regards,
"nilkids"
>
>Thanks,
>Mandy S.
>

[thebestcooker]

Little girl, you better shut your mouth and leave it alone if you know
what's good for you. This man means nothing to you, you only want a
check from him. Why do you think he'd choose you and your brat over a
good life in the Carribean anyway ? He already belongs to other
women, they won't take kindly to you spreading his personal business
all over the internet either. Get out while you can, he left you, but
we'll find you. Keep running your mouth bitch, and you'll see what
happens. ****ing welfare parasite bitch.

[[email protected]]

In Message-ID:<Qn0Id.7795$Nu.2507@fed1read04> posted on Thu,
20 Jan 2005 21:26:10 -0800, DaKitty wrote:

>
>"Veronique" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>> Casey wrote:
>> > Kari spewed:
>> > > Storm wrote:
>> > > > Kari spewed:
>> > > > > A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
>> > > > > to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
>> > > > > **** the bodies...as Pete would say.
>> > > > >
>> > > > Kari,
>> > > >
>> > > > Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it
>> aint pretty.
>> > >
>> > > Glad to know I offended you. Proud to be
>> > > a meanie. So go off yourself, too.
>> >
>> > Please tell me your main newsgroup of interest is the childfree one.
>> > We can only hope that your gene pool has finally reached a dead end.
>>
>> >
>> > Or that you're just a troll.
>> >
>> >
>> > Casey
>>
>
>> meant she should have gotten an abortion 15 years ago.
>
>Wow, now there's someone fit to be a mother!
>[eyeroll]
>
Hmm, well, I wouldn't disagree with the abortion option, I
do believe that anyone in the world has a innate right to
approach any genuine support group for help and advice.

Some on the group might want to offer practical suggestions,
but I don't believe that anyone on any support group has any
right to be deliberately hostile to a person seeking advice.

Hell, I think that we have an obligation to Caine, Mroo,
Veronica, and even to try to be
reasonably pleasant with one another rather than trying to
be unreasonable assholes.

Perhaps we on ASCF cannot always manage to be pleasant, but
surely if we wish to be assholes we can manage to sound like
logical and reasonable assholes! :-)

Regards,
"nilkids"

[Tsorton]

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 22:22:57 GMT, "LOA" <Little Orphan
> wrote:

>
>"Kari" > wrote in message
>news:PlbId.3563$BL3.1954@trnddc01...
>> Tsorton wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 08:39:26 -0800, "tom c"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"DaKitty" > wrote in message
>>>>news:gw0Id.7802$Nu.59@fed1read04...
>>>>
>>>>>>I can believe that abut you. You do come across as someone who likes to
>>>>>>use
>>>>>
>>>>>people.
>>>>
>>>>Just like the original poster, used him for cash, used him as an unwanted
>>>>sperm donor and wants to use a childfree newsgroup to do her homework.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Yea, I do feel bad for the husband.
>>>>>It's okay, he can always come to our group and get some support...
>>>>>later.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Looking to husband steal?
>>>>
>>>>Tom C
>>>
>>>
>>> /snork
>>>
>>> Nah, what decent guy would go for a stretched out ****, prolapsed
>>> uterus, udder hanging up to her knees and pair of crotchfuit thrown in
>>> to make entire package 'simply irresistible'?
>>
>>
>>
>> That would surely gross out DH. Plus, I don't think he
>> would be too turned on by this knuckle-dragging cave dweller
>> troll.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Madia, wondering why Da****ly took Kari's post so personal....
>>
>>
>>
>> Breeders always take things personal when a CFer shows
>> them a different point of view. :)
>>
>>
>>
>> Kari
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kari Levstik
>>
>
>Too bad your parent's bred.......and what the hell's a "CF"? **** Farter?
>

Awwwwww, here comes another one of those Holy Martyrs (tm).
So, what's your story? TeenMoo in distress? Ex-SAHMOO abandoned
by un-appreciating Wallet? Saintly Single Moo that can't even remember
who inseminated her last time around?

Madia, amused

[[email protected]]

In > posted on
Fri, 21 Jan 2005 17:54:55 GMT, The Dave© wrote:

>> Rorqhual wrote:
>> > Ahem... isn't the reason you're here because of the fact that you
>> > got pregnant without thinking?
>> >
>> Define 'here'. The OP Xposted to asc, presumably on the mistaken
>> asumption that alt.support.childfree has something to do with chyuhld
>> support.
>>
>> If you want to avoid disturbing responses, you might do well to edit
>> asc out of your replies.
>>
>> You might also want to check which froups you are Xposting to before
>> you make silly assumptions, but that's entirely up to you
>
>Several points:
>
>"Here" is where she posted and where I read it.
>
>Crossposting doesn't concern me, but if you must know, I did know that
>it was crossposted to ASC and didn't care one whit. I would agree that
>posting to ASC was not really relevant, but it's not nearly as far off
>as people posting abortion topics on a model train group, for example.
>
>It's amusing that the people in ASC insist on exhibiting child-like
>behavior such as purposely misspelling words like "child", "parent",
>etc. If you want to be seen as a mature adults, act like it. Show
>some personal dignity.

Totally agree! At least avoid the deliberately childish
misspellings! IMHO, this makes the group sound like a
group of paranoid children rather than reasonably serious
adults.

Regards,
"nilkids"

[tom c]

"The Dave©" > wrote in message
...
>> Stephanie Stowe wrote:
>> She is not the OP.
>
> Damn, you're right. I stand corrected.
>

Not if your sitting at your computer

<ducking and running>

Tom C

[Dusty]

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
news:1106263808.8ec7165ddd12fb42d3dd2345f9e85bb1@t eranews...
> Hello,
>
> I was involved for a time with a man by the name of Michael F.
> O'Shaughnessy..


He's dead.

No wait - he moved to Brazil 12 years ago. Or was it Argentina.. I don't
remember. Maybe if you sent me $50k I could remember.

Better yet, get off your lazy ass and get a job! Then you can send me the
cash. Then I might remember.. But if he sends me $5.00 I could forget
again, so you should make it $200k, that way I won't forget. Maybe..

[tom c]

"V" > wrote in message
...
>
> Crossposting is not barging. It was posted in our group as well.
Which one?

It appears by all the conflict the troll has accomplished its goal.


TC

[tom c]

"V" > wrote in message
...
>
> Jason does not get to "hit" anything often.
> V

Boy are you clueless.


Tom C

[tom c]

"V" > wrote in message
...
>
> Oh, I see the problem, Kari is all mad about financial aid not assisting
> her.
> Gee, I thought it was all about the bad childhood.
> Tsk.
> V

Funny thing is a large amount of the child abusers I report at work had the
sprog so they could love it and give it the childhood they didn't have. They
do, they beat it harder.


Tom C

[[email protected]]

In
>
posted on Fri, 21 Jan 2005 05:41:44 -0000, Terry Austin
wrote:

>"Storm" > wrote in :
>
>> Kari,
>>
>> Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it aint
>> pretty.
>
>Golddigging ****s who oops an innocent man never are. Kari, on the other
>hand, may well be a goddess.

A fertile man who screws a woman without making sure that no
kids result can hardly be called "innocent". That is like
firing a machine gun into a crowd and claiming that they
didn't intend to hit anyone.

No person who is careless enough to deliberately harm
another can possibly be called "innocent", whether they
refuse to use a condom, drive a car with bald tires and bad
brakes, drug someone's drink, or whatever.

Are some males these days so damn desperate for a piece of
ass that they have to resort to drugs?

Talk about lack of self-respect! Hell, if they are _that_
desperate perhaps they should move to a rural area, attend a
livestock auction, and buy cull sheep as "pets" for $5 a
head or even less.

Regards,
"nilkids"

[Rod Speed]

> wrote in message
...
> In Message-ID:<Qn0Id.7795$Nu.2507@fed1read04> posted on Thu,
> 20 Jan 2005 21:26:10 -0800, DaKitty wrote:
>
>>
>>"Veronique" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>>> Casey wrote:
>>> > Kari spewed:
>>> > > Storm wrote:
>>> > > > Kari spewed:
>>> > > > > A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
>>> > > > > to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
>>> > > > > **** the bodies...as Pete would say.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > Kari,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it
>>> aint pretty.
>>> > >
>>> > > Glad to know I offended you. Proud to be
>>> > > a meanie. So go off yourself, too.
>>> >
>>> > Please tell me your main newsgroup of interest is the childfree one.
>>> > We can only hope that your gene pool has finally reached a dead end.
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Or that you're just a troll.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Casey
>>>
>>
>>> meant she should have gotten an abortion 15 years ago.
>>
>>Wow, now there's someone fit to be a mother!
>>[eyeroll]
>>
> Hmm, well, I wouldn't disagree with the abortion option, I
> do believe that anyone in the world has a innate right to
> approach any genuine support group for help and advice.
>
> Some on the group might want to offer practical suggestions,
> but I don't believe that anyone on any support group has any
> right to be deliberately hostile to a person seeking advice.

Corse they do. In spades with the hippo 'support' groups.

> Hell, I think that we have an obligation to Caine, Mroo,
> Veronica, and even to try to
> be reasonably pleasant with one another rather than
> trying to be unreasonable assholes.

> Perhaps we on ASCF cannot always manage to be
> pleasant, but surely if we wish to be assholes we can
> manage to sound like logical and reasonable assholes! :-)

You didnt.

[Rod Speed]

> wrote in message
...

> Didn't it ever occur to you to try to verify his identity
> before you trusted him that much? (Let him **** you)

> If he had a car, in many states at that time it wouldn't
> have been that difficult to get a look at the registration
> certificate or check out the license plate number?
> Or get a look at his social security number?

> Yeah, I know that some people such as >
> might consider me and others on alt.support.childfree, might
> consider us excessively suspicious, but I wouldn't let him
> or anyone else even into my house unless had some sort of a
> track on them.

And you wonder why I say you are mindlessly irrationally paranoid...

> Identity fraud is far too easy, especially these days.

Pity that was 15 years ago.

[DaKitty]

"Andre Lieven" > wrote in message
...
>
> Terry Austin ) writes:
> > "DaKitty" > wrote in
> > news:fH0Id.7807$Nu.3514@fed1read04:
> >
> >> "Terry Austin" > wrote in message
> >> . 3.50...
> >>> "Storm" > wrote in :
> >>>
> >>> > Kari,
> >>> >
> >>> > Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it
> >>> > aint pretty.
> >>>
> >>> Golddigging ****s who oops an innocent man never are. Kari, on the
> >>> other hand, may well be a goddess.
> >>
> >> *groan*
> >> Right, it required no action on his part to make a baby!
> >
> > If she lied about being on birth control - and she probably did - he's
> > not at fault beyond getting involved with a golddigging ****.
>
> Indeed. Lets consider both sides of this issye, which will show why the
> sexist cat's claim is false.

Yeah, right... take that to the judge.

[DaKitty]

"V" > wrote in message
...
>
> "DaKitty" > wrote in message
> news:Dr0Id.7797$Nu.4768@fed1read04...
> >
> > "Kari" > wrote in message
> > news:93_Hd.1215$BL3.13@trnddc01...
> > > V wrote:
> > > >>Mandy Smith wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>>Hello,
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
> > > >>to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
> > > >>just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.
> > > >>
> > > >>A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
> > > >>to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
> > > >>**** the bodies...as Pete would say.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > You are one nasty human being, even if this Pete person said it
first.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thank you. Trolls deserve evry bit of flaming and
> > > biting that is dished out here when they barge in
> > > uninvited.
> > >
> > > You can't just barge in here, **** on the rug, then
> > > expect not to be spanked for doing so.
> > >
> > > Now, don't you have some kids to ignore?
> >
> > You know, you could see a doctor for that nasty condition you've got. I
> > think he might give you some xanax or similar. Really, it will help.
> > [DaKitty: thinking she knows exactly why the marriage is childless and
> > feeling sorry for the husband.]
> >
> >
>
> Ice is coming to mind.
> V

Reading my mind, aren't you :) ;)

[DaKitty]

"tom c" > wrote in message
...
>
> "DaKitty" > wrote in message
> news:gw0Id.7802$Nu.59@fed1read04...
> >
> >> I can believe that abut you. You do come across as someone who likes to
> >> use
> > people.
>
> Just like the original poster, used him for cash, used him as an unwanted
> sperm donor and wants to use a childfree newsgroup to do her homework.
>
> > Yea, I do feel bad for the husband.
> > It's okay, he can always come to our group and get some support...
later.
>
>
> Looking to husband steal?

No

[DaKitty]

> "Kari" > wrote in message
> news:PlbId.3563$BL3.1954@trnddc01...
> > Tsorton wrote:
> >> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 08:39:26 -0800, "tom c"
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"DaKitty" > wrote in message
> >>>news:gw0Id.7802$Nu.59@fed1read04...
> >>>
> >>>>>I can believe that abut you. You do come across as someone who likes
to
> >>>>>use
> >>>>
> >>>>people.
> >>>
> >>>Just like the original poster, used him for cash, used him as an
unwanted
> >>>sperm donor and wants to use a childfree newsgroup to do her homework.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Yea, I do feel bad for the husband.
> >>>>It's okay, he can always come to our group and get some support...
> >>>>later.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Looking to husband steal?
> >>>
> >>>Tom C
> >>
> >>
> >> /snork
> >>
> >> Nah, what decent guy would go for a stretched out ****, prolapsed
> >> uterus, udder hanging up to her knees and pair of crotchfuit thrown in
> >> to make entire package 'simply irresistible'?
> >
> >
> >
> > That would surely gross out DH. Plus, I don't think he
> > would be too turned on by this knuckle-dragging cave dweller
> > troll.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Madia, wondering why Da****ly took Kari's post so personal....
> >
> >
> >
> > Breeders always take things personal when a CFer shows
> > them a different point of view. :)


Sorry Little Hun, I don't have kids. And I have a most wonderful man of my
own.
Probably living in a rather similar way you do. I just don't have your kind
of need to be nasty.

[DaKitty]

"Tsorton" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 08:39:26 -0800, "tom c"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"DaKitty" > wrote in message
> >news:gw0Id.7802$Nu.59@fed1read04...
> >>
> >>> I can believe that abut you. You do come across as someone who likes
to
> >>> use
> >> people.
> >
> >Just like the original poster, used him for cash, used him as an unwanted
> >sperm donor and wants to use a childfree newsgroup to do her homework.
> >
> >> Yea, I do feel bad for the husband.
> >> It's okay, he can always come to our group and get some support...
later.
> >
> >
> >Looking to husband steal?
> >
> >Tom C
>
> Madia, wondering why
> Da****ly

Yawn, that's original...

> took Kari's post so personal....

When I see a filthy cockroach running around where it shouldn't be, I have a
tendency to get rid if it.
I guess you don't.

[DaKitty]

"LOA" <Little Orphan > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Kari" > wrote in message
> news:PlbId.3563$BL3.1954@trnddc01...
> > Tsorton wrote:
> >> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 08:39:26 -0800, "tom c"
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"DaKitty" > wrote in message
> >>>news:gw0Id.7802$Nu.59@fed1read04...
> >>>
> >>>>>I can believe that abut you. You do come across as someone who likes
to
> >>>>>use
> >>>>
> >>>>people.
> >>>
> >>>Just like the original poster, used him for cash, used him as an
unwanted
> >>>sperm donor and wants to use a childfree newsgroup to do her homework.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Yea, I do feel bad for the husband.
> >>>>It's okay, he can always come to our group and get some support...
> >>>>later.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Looking to husband steal?
> >>>
> >>>Tom C
> >>
> >>
> >> /snork
> >>
> >> Nah, what decent guy would go for a stretched out ****, prolapsed
> >> uterus, udder hanging up to her knees and pair of crotchfuit thrown in
> >> to make entire package 'simply irresistible'?
> >
> >
> >
> > That would surely gross out DH. Plus, I don't think he
> > would be too turned on by this knuckle-dragging cave dweller
> > troll.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Madia, wondering why Da****ly took Kari's post so personal....
> >
> >
> >
> > Breeders always take things personal when a CFer shows
> > them a different point of view. :)
> >
> >
> >
> > Kari
> Too bad your parent's bred.......and what the hell's a "CF"? **** Farter?
>

Gotta love the presumptuous little creepy bunch. All this wasted effort at
trying to make insults. I don't have kids, never been pregnant. And would
have to kill myself before I'd want to associate with *that* bunch.
They'll have to come up with something relevant if they want to look
something other than impotent.
But then again, one needs to consider the source.

[mroo philpott-smythe]

"V" > wrote in news:6ZZHd.1120$Om.1101
@news02.roc.ny:
> "Kari" > wrote in message
> news:ynXHd.10340$HT6.4245@trnddc04...
>> Mandy Smith wrote:

>> > Hello,

>> You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
>> to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
>> just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.

Yaknow, this dumb bint Randy Snatch or whatever her name is ****ed some
guy without protection, *never* considered giving the man the option, or
even *any say* as to whether *he* wanted a lifetime of support payments
or a lifetime relationship with a stupid heifer, and now she's all
upsetty because she can't siphon off his money. And she wants *us,* of
all people, to feel sorry for her.

>> A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
>> to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
>> **** the bodies...as Pete would say.

> You are one nasty human being, even if this Pete person said it first.

Baby, you haven't even begun to see nasty yet. And what about *you,*
skankho? Don't you have some Li'l Skanks to mind? Shouldn't you be
watching their asses so they don't kill themselves or anyone else? Or did
you already put them in a Texas Bath before you started hanging out on
the net?

What a dumb****. Kill your children, cook them well, eat their bodies,
and then **** them.

sq

[mroo philpott-smythe]

"DaKitty" > wrote in news:Dr0Id.7797$Nu.4768
@fed1read04:
> "Kari" > wrote in message
> news:93_Hd.1215$BL3.13@trnddc01...
>> V wrote:
>> >>Mandy Smith wrote:


>> >>>Hello,

>> >>You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
>> >>to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
>> >>just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.

>> >>A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
>> >>to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
>> >>**** the bodies...as Pete would say.

>> > You are one nasty human being, even if this Pete person said it
>> > first.

>> Thank you. Trolls deserve evry bit of flaming and
>> biting that is dished out here when they barge in
>> uninvited.

>> You can't just barge in here, **** on the rug, then
>> expect not to be spanked for doing so.

>> Now, don't you have some kids to ignore?

> You know, you could see a doctor for that nasty condition you've got. I
> think he might give you some xanax or similar. Really, it will help.
> [DaKitty: thinking she knows exactly why the marriage is childless and
> feeling sorry for the husband.]

I call BINGO!!! <Sips wine>

Hey, CrotchRot, how come you don't feel sorry for poor DisappearedGuy who
got oopsed by Randy Snatch? Oh, wait, you probly oopsed your old man
yourself.

sq, "Willing to bet DaddyO is banging some hot young number while Mooo
lows on the Net"

[Kenneth S.]

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
news:1106263808.8ec7165ddd12fb42d3dd2345f9e85bb1@t eranews...
> Hello,
>
> I was involved for a time with a man by the name of Michael F.
> O'Shaughnessy when I live in Central New York(I lived in Morrisville,
NY).
> He was very handsome, and a smooth talker, we used to talk alot, and
seemed
> to have nice times together with me and my aged mother(I came from a
single
> parent family). Anyway, when he decided to not wear a condom, as expected
9
> months later I gave birth to beautiful baby girl. Then that's when the
> trouble started, when he found out I was pregnant he became enraged. Then
he
> got a U-haul (when I was at a friends house) and moved all of his stuff
out
> on me. My daughter Sarah is 15 years old now, and has not seen ONE RED
CENT
> of support from her father Mike. I know he has alot of money too. When I
> was with him he used to wear the finest clothes, and he worked two jobs, I
> saw some of his paychecks and they were always around $700-800.00 a week.
> You would think making over a grand a week he could share with my daughter
> and I, but no he does nothing ! I have been to family court several times
> to try to get him to provide for his daughter. They Judges always rule in
my
> favor, but then I never get any payments from that jerk Michael F.
> O'Shaughnessy.
>
> I will describe how he looks now: He has curly black hair, he is very
tall
> too(over 6 feet tall), he is a White Man(Irish, but he said he's not ?),
> also he told me he was from a place called Massena. That's in Canada I
> believe. Anyway, I work myself to the bone, making only about $300.00 a
> week, I get food stamps too and partial rental assistance too from the
> State. But life is really painful for us, he doesn't care though. As soon
as
> he made a child, he was off and running. If this is any help, the last
place
> I heard he was is, Santa Barbara,CA Solvay,NY(possibly staying with a
girl
> named Valerie) New Orleans, LA & Las Vegas. Thanks for listening to me
> gripe. Please respond directly to me on the newsgroup. I don't use my
normal
> email address here. Thanks do much for your help. And other women here's
> some free advice: "STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM MICHAEL FRED O'SHAUGHNESSY " !
> It's the best advice I can give any other woman, so he won't ruin your
life
> too. Take care and thanks ahead of time for any help you can provide.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Mandy S.
>

Why, you poor helpless little creature, Mandy! Women would be
well-advised to stay away from this frightful bounder, Michael Fred
O'Shaughnessy. There's a serious risk that not all women know about those
smooth-talking, curly-haired Irishmen, but you've warned them. Does this
O'Shaughnessy man by any chance have a waxed moustache that he twirls from
time to time?

So . . .he didn't wear a condom? What a rat! But, wait,
couldn't you have taken contraceptive precautions yourself? And didn't you
have post-conception reproductive choices (abortion, adoption, etc.) that
this O'Shaughnessy man didn't have? And isn't it true to say that YOU are
solely responsible for being in your present situation?

(All right, confess -- "Mandy" is really InoPayCS or Mel, or one
of the other male regulars on the alt.child-support news group, isn't (s)he?
This is really just an effort to spoof the helpless
"female-victim-of-wicked-man" mindset, isn't it?)

Altogether now . . . with feeling . . .
"She was poor, but she was honest,
Victim of a rich man's whim.
First he loved her; then he left her.
Ain't it all a blooming shame?"

[mroo philpott-smythe]

"Storm" > wrote in :

> Might want to start.
> It can only help your disposition....

Jeebus another one whose brain fell out her ****. With all the Breeder
Bingo goin on, if we drank outside of the bingo game, we'd be permanently
stewed.

Have I posted my Roast Fetus recipe for you?

sq

[mroo philpott-smythe]

Casey > wrote in news:kE_Hd.62600$Wo.58761
@lakeread08:
> Kari said
>> Storm wrote:


>> > Might want to start.
>> > It can only help your disposition....

>> I don't have to get drunk to improve my disposition, nor
>> do I need to force myself into alcoholism to prove my
>> adulthood.

> In your case, it would be a useless waste of good alcohol.

So do, please, enlighten us. What is a *useful* waste of good alcohol?

Pickling Brats?

sq

[mroo philpott-smythe]

"DaKitty" > wrote in
news:gw0Id.7802$Nu.59@fed1read04:
> "Kari" > wrote in message
> news:5r0Id.18632$c%6.1784@trnddc03...
>> tom c wrote:
>> > "Kari" > wrote in message


>> > It looks like you acquired a fan club. Don't forget to print a new
>> > BINGO card.

>> I think I do need a new one. The other one is used up.

> I can believe that abut you. You do come across as someone who likes
> to use people.
> Yea, I do feel bad for the husband.
> It's okay, he can always come to our group and get some support...
> later.

You better get a nice big sorry on, then, since this NG is crammed fulla
people with juice no seeds. %^D

I lerve these moronic amateur psych ****s - bet she just Read A Popular
Book on the topic.

sq

[tom c]

"DaKitty" > wrote in message
news:lfjId.9174$Nu.8098@fed1read04...
> When I see a filthy cockroach running around where it shouldn't be, I have
> a
> tendency to get rid if it.
> I guess you don't.
>
>
So spray yourself with Raid already.

[terrible tommy's childfree almanac]

"DaKitty" > wrote in message
news:Et0Id.7800$Nu.6796@fed1read04...
>
> What adulthood?
> Lemme help you... the good old www.m-w.com doesn't define adulthood as
> 2-year-old-like tantrums.
>
No but the Almanac sees a definite case of pot kettle black and don't
criticize the splinter in another's eye when the board in your own obscures
your vision.

TTCFA

[tom c]

"DaKitty" > wrote in message
news:ukjId.9175$Nu.7701@fed1read04...
>
> have to kill myself before I'd want to associate with *that* bunch.


Then why are you still here?

[vixanne]

Mandy Smith wrote:

> (I came from a single
> parent family).

And the proud tradition lives on.

[Cristabel]

Mandy, why in the name of the nine frozen hells didn't you get an abortion?

You made a choice to have sex.
You made a choice to do so without protection.
You chose not to take the "morning after" pill.
You chose to whelp the *******.
And, astonishingly, you chose to *keep* the *******.

What were you thinking?

And don't go off on me that abortion is immoral. So is ****ing outside of
marriage but you didn't seem to have any trouble doing that!

Cristabel. Women like you make ashamed. It's a wonder we still have the
vote.

[Terry Austin]

(Andre Lieven) wrote in
:

>
> Terry Austin ) writes:
>> "DaKitty" > wrote in
>> news:fH0Id.7807$Nu.3514@fed1read04:
>>
>>> "Terry Austin" > wrote in message
>>> . 3.50...
>>>> "Storm" > wrote in :
>>>>
>>>> > Kari,
>>>> >
>>>> > Shut up...your response reveals to much about yourself, and, it
>>>> > aint pretty.
>>>>
>>>> Golddigging ****s who oops an innocent man never are. Kari, on the
>>>> other hand, may well be a goddess.
>>>
>>> *groan*
>>> Right, it required no action on his part to make a baby!
>>
>> If she lied about being on birth control - and she probably did - he's
>> not at fault beyond getting involved with a golddigging ****.
>
> Indeed. Lets consider both sides of this issye, which will show why the
> sexist cat's claim is false.

Since we have no facts at all, examination of the speculation will show
nothing at all, except that you are a retard. Who masturbates too much.
*Way* too much.

--
Terry Austin
http://www.hyperbooks.com/
Campaign Cartographer Now Available

[[email protected]]

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 03:09:46 GMT, Kari >
wrote:

>Storm wrote:
>
>> Casey, do you really think someone like her
>> can interest a guy long enough, to actually have sex and breed with her?
>>
>
>FYI, trolltard, I am too damn smart to make baybees.
>Unlike you, I prefer to think with my brain instead of my
>uterus. I am also happily married. So write that on a
>piece of 200-grit sandpaper and shove it up your ass--
>make sure to move your nose over first.

Storm, it my opinion she's been sanding wood with her 200 grit **** as
nobody but a peckerless ******* could toletate long enough for a cum
anyway.

[V]

"tom c" > wrote in message
...
>
> "V" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Oh, I see the problem, Kari is all mad about financial aid not assisting
> > her.
> > Gee, I thought it was all about the bad childhood.
> > Tsk.
> > V
>
> Funny thing is a large amount of the child abusers I report at work had the
> sprog so they could love it and give it the childhood they didn't have. They
> do, they beat it harder.
>
>
> Tom C
>
>

Funny thing, many rape victims that I work with are raped by men. I guess I
will start a group to hate men....::sigh::
You have no point. Just because you witness abuse, does not mean that all
people are in that category. Find someone to talk to ....
V

-Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to
realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.
-- Ronald Reagan

[Joscelin]

"Ezzy" > wrote in message
ps.com...
> 1. You're a troll. Go away.
>>SNIP<<

Well spoken Ezzy, bravo!

~Joscelin

[jermec]

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
news:1106334344.ab33067d2cdf8cd6e07b6fc68ab1af45@t eranews...
> Alot of the people on here are terribly mean, I wish there were more kind
> hearted people around. It makes me feel very ashamed of my fellow
> Americans.
>
**** off breeder. I'm British and stand by all on ASC, whatever their
nationality.
Oh, I forgot, the interweb forum is 'Merkin innit? I should probably just
bow and scrape and grovel to you for allowing me to post here.

jermec, mighty ****ed off

[Tsorton]

On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 22:15:35 -0000, "jermec" > wrote:

>
>
>
>"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
>news:1106334344.ab33067d2cdf8cd6e07b6fc68ab1af45@t eranews...
>> Alot of the people on here are terribly mean, I wish there were more kind
>> hearted people around. It makes me feel very ashamed of my fellow
>> Americans.
>>
> **** off breeder. I'm British and stand by all on ASC, whatever their
>nationality.
>Oh, I forgot, the interweb forum is 'Merkin innit? I should probably just
>bow and scrape and grovel to you for allowing me to post here.
>
>jermec, mighty ****ed off
>

You honestly don't know there is no world outside of 'merkin
borders?


Madia, scandalised

[tom c]

> wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 03:09:46 GMT, Kari >
> Storm, it my opinion she's been sanding wood with her 200 grit **** as
> nobody but a peckerless ******* could toletate long enough for a cum
> anyway.
>

Don't bother, she won't answer your call dickless.

[tom c]

> Funny thing, many rape victims that I work with are raped by men. I guess
> I
> will start a group to hate men....::sigh::
> You have no point. Just because you witness abuse, does not mean that all
> people are in that category. Find someone to talk to ....
> V
Typical. Stick your head in the sand and run from the problem instead of
stepping up and doing something about it.
At least I, with no dog in that pony show, have the guts to do something
about it. What about you?


Tom C

[[email protected]]

In > posted on
Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:43:35 -0800, tom c wrote:

>
>
>> Funny thing, many rape victims that I work with are raped by men. I guess
>> I
>> will start a group to hate men....::sigh::
>> You have no point. Just because you witness abuse, does not mean that all
>> people are in that category. Find someone to talk to ....
>> V
>Typical. Stick your head in the sand and run from the problem instead of
>stepping up and doing something about it.
>At least I, with no dog in that pony show, have the guts to do something
>about it. What about you?
>
>
>Tom C
>
IMHO, nice post. Realistic as well. Perhaps I should
mention that some posts on alt.support.childfree are much
more realistic than others.

Posts on alt.support.childfree can be as "rough as guts" but
sometimes there are some very realistic posts on it.

Most people shouldn't expect _any_ degree of "emotional
support" here, as the group can be extremely brutal.
However, they might expect a certain degree of realism if
they are lucky!

Many might claim that this is the best that they could hope
for.

Personally, I would quote from the "Gamblers Song" by Kenny
Rodgers.

"You have to know when to hold them, and know when to fold
them, and the best that you can hope for is to die in your
sleep."

Regards,
"nilkids"

Regards,
"nilkids"

[V]

"tom c" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> > Funny thing, many rape victims that I work with are raped by men. I guess
> > I
> > will start a group to hate men....::sigh::
> > You have no point. Just because you witness abuse, does not mean that all
> > people are in that category. Find someone to talk to ....
> > V
> Typical. Stick your head in the sand and run from the problem instead of
> stepping up and doing something about it.
> At least I, with no dog in that pony show, have the guts to do something
> about it. What about you?
>
>
> Tom C
>
>

What problem am I running from?
You are babbling.
V

--
"One way to stop a runaway horse is to bet on him."
Jeffrey Bernard.

[V]

> wrote in message
...
> In > posted on
> Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:43:35 -0800, tom c wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >> Funny thing, many rape victims that I work with are raped by men. I guess
> >> I
> >> will start a group to hate men....::sigh::
> >> You have no point. Just because you witness abuse, does not mean that all
> >> people are in that category. Find someone to talk to ....
> >> V
> >Typical. Stick your head in the sand and run from the problem instead of
> >stepping up and doing something about it.
> >At least I, with no dog in that pony show, have the guts to do something
> >about it. What about you?
> >
> >
> >Tom C
> >
> IMHO, nice post. Realistic as well. Perhaps I should
> mention that some posts on alt.support.childfree are much
> more realistic than others.
>
> Posts on alt.support.childfree can be as "rough as guts" but
> sometimes there are some very realistic posts on it.
>
> Most people shouldn't expect _any_ degree of "emotional
> support" here, as the group can be extremely brutal.
> However, they might expect a certain degree of realism if
> they are lucky!
>
> Many might claim that this is the best that they could hope
> for.
>
> Personally, I would quote from the "Gamblers Song" by Kenny
> Rodgers.
>
> "You have to know when to hold them, and know when to fold
> them, and the best that you can hope for is to die in your
> sleep."
>
> Regards,
> "nilkids"
>
> Regards,
> "nilkids"
>
>
>
>
>

OMG. I know he just did not.....
lol...
V

--
The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly.
-- Abraham Lincoln

[ChildFree Abby]

Maundy Smith wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I was involved for a time with a man by the name of Michael F.
> O'Shaughnessy when I live in Central New York(I lived in Morrisville, NY).
> He was very handsome, and a smooth talker, we used to talk alot, and seemed
> to have nice times together with me and my aged mother(I came from a single
> parent family). Anyway, when he decided to not wear a condom, as expected 9
> months later I gave birth to beautiful baby girl. Then that's when the
> trouble started, when he found out I was pregnant he became enraged. Then he
> got a U-haul (when I was at a friends house) and moved all of his stuff out
> on me. My daughter Sarah is 15 years old now, and has not seen ONE RED CENT
> of support from her father Mike. I know he has alot of money too. When I
> was with him he used to wear the finest clothes, and he worked two jobs, I
> saw some of his paychecks and they were always around $700-800.00 a week.
> You would think making over a grand a week he could share with my daughter
> and I, but no he does nothing ! I have been to family court several times
> to try to get him to provide for his daughter. They Judges always rule in my
> favor, but then I never get any payments from that jerk Michael F.
> O'Shaughnessy.
>

Snippage
>
>

You know to be honest, I don't have any sympathy for either you or the
long gone Mike. You displayed some real lack of judgement in your
decision, and yes, it was yours, to forgo contraception and have a child
with someone you obviously knew so little about. "Having some nice
times with me and my aged mother" does not a secure and stable
relationship make. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the guy
would be "lukewarm" to say the least to the idea of parenthood. So why
the hell you chose to have a kid with this guy is completely and utterly
beyond me. No one forced you to have sex, and pregnancy is not
inevitable, they have figured out what causes it and most importantly
how to prevent it. So Mike took off and you are spending your life
tracking him down because you want a wallet. I'm pretty sure that's all
you wanted from him even before you got pregnant, and figured that
"having his baby" would keep him. Dream on. You have now spent 15
years of your life chasing this yo yo when you could have devoted that
time to bettering yourself, or you could have had an abortion and
avoided this whole mess entirely.


As for "Love 'em and Leave 'em Mike", I don't have any sympathy for him
either. Like it or not, he did father a child, and it is his
responsibility to support it and keep it off the public dole. Before
anyone gets on his high horse about how "men don't have any choice"
matters of this sort, I beg to differ. Men do have choices - Wrap, snip
or do without. They might not be the choices they want or like, but
that is not the same as having no choice. It doesn't take an Einstein
to realize that the dice in this game are loaded. As soon as conception
occurs, everything is out of his hands, he has no choice, and no power
in this situation at all. So, if someone who does not want children
makes the deliberate choice to surrender responsibility for
contraception to someone else, he has given up what power and choice he
had. It may not be fair, but at this point in time, those are the rules
of the game. Mike did just that: he willingly surrendered his
responsibility. I'd bet good money that all the signs that Maundy was
looking for a meal ticket were in plain sight.

Maundy will never give up the hunt, and Mike will live his life trying
to dodge it. These two morons deserve each other.

ChildFree Abby

--
The ChildFree Abby Archives - http://www.dismal-light.net/childfreeabby/

[V]

"'Kate" > wrote in message
...

snip
> What? Miss several stanzas? Yep.
>
> (BTW... this is not crossposted to other groups)
>
>

You are a good person Kate. I just hit reply and actually, used to not
crosspost. I am such a bad shameless agitator. ;-)
V

[tom c]

"V" > wrote in message
...
>
> "tom c" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>
>> > Funny thing, many rape victims that I work with are raped by men. I
>> > guess
>> > I
>> > will start a group to hate men....::sigh::
>> > You have no point. Just because you witness abuse, does not mean that
>> > all
>> > people are in that category. Find someone to talk to ....
>> > V
>> Typical. Stick your head in the sand and run from the problem instead of
>> stepping up and doing something about it.
>> At least I, with no dog in that pony show, have the guts to do something
>> about it. What about you?
>>
>>
>> Tom C
>>
>>
>
> What problem am I running from?
> You are babbling.
> V


You need to learn to read. Maybe if you took the breeder beam out of your
eye you could criticize the splinter in mine.

[[email protected]]

>Don't bother, she won't answer your call dickless.
^Tis a job your better suited for anyway...

Nutered chicken****.

[Veronique]

Mandy Smith yammered:


> Oh, I had no idea that Kari had family in the UK too. And yes while
you're
> at it, you can get on your knees and bow down. When I was with
Michael F.
> O'Shaughnessy he did tell me how the British stole food from the
Irish
> during the "potato famine". He said he was going to join the IRA, I
hope he
> did at some point. That would have been the one good thing he did
with his
> meaningless life. Because he sure hasn't given his daughter one dime,
or
> ever written letters and cards to know that he loves her. Which is
almost
> free by the way. For a man that walks around with a box of $100.00
Cohibas,
> and the finest clothes and vehicles, that's pretty selfish.

You were ****ing an IRA terrorist? Maybe you got lucky and he's dead.

>
> [blah blah blah blah blah] I am sure a selfish cuunt like you would
abort her kid.


Sure! And if you'd aborted, look how much better your life would have
been? Might be making more than minimum wage, stuck with a snotty
fifteen year old whose mother is a terrorist sympathiser and whose
father is wanted by Interpol.


V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep

[Kari]

Mandy Smith wrote:

That's all there is to it. And
> Kari, when you have kids, then you are in a position to say something to me,
> & other moms and dads who try to provide for their Children when a deadbeat
> skips out.


I will always be smarter than you because I prefer to
think with my brain instead of my uterus. Unlike you,
I won't ever burden myself with kids--especially
illegitimate ones.

Again, kill your kid, then yourself, then ****
the bodies.


Kari...NOT SORRY

[ChildFree Abby]

Mandy Smith wrote:
> Oh, I had no idea that Kari had family in the UK too. And yes while you're
> at it, you can get on your knees and bow down. When I was with Michael F.
> O'Shaughnessy he did tell me how the British stole food from the Irish
> during the "potato famine". He said he was going to join the IRA, I hope he
> did at some point. That would have been the one good thing he did with his
> meaningless life. Because he sure hasn't given his daughter one dime, or
> ever written letters and cards to know that he loves her. Which is almost
> free by the way. For a man that walks around with a box of $100.00 Cohibas,
> and the finest clothes and vehicles, that's pretty selfish.
>

And you bought all this bull****? Hook, Line and Sinker? Did he offer to
sell you a bridge, too? My Dawg, you make me wonder just how stupid
someone could be and still remember to breathe, much less fornicate.

You are dumber than a box of hair. You are a disgrace to the human
species.

ChildFree Abby



--
The ChildFree Abby Archives - http://www.dismal-light.net/childfreeabby/

[DaKitty]

Kari wrote:
> Mandy Smith wrote:
>
> That's all there is to it. And
> > Kari, when you have kids, then you are in a position to say
something to me,
> > & other moms and dads who try to provide for their Children when a
deadbeat
> > skips out.
>
>
> I will always be smarter than you because I prefer to
> think with my brain instead of my uterus. Unlike you,
> I won't ever burden myself with kids--especially
> illegitimate ones.
>
> Again, kill your kid, then yourself, then ****
> the bodies.
>
>
> Kari...NOT SORRY

When the next deviant crime occurs, we'll know to look for Kari.
Or maybe she speaks from experience already???

[The Dave©]

> Kari wrote:
> Again, kill your kid, then yourself, then ****
> the bodies.

How does that work, genius?

[Gutterboy]

ChildFree Abby wrote:
> Mandy Smith wrote:
>
>> Oh, I had no idea that Kari had family in the UK too. And yes while
>> you're
>> at it, you can get on your knees and bow down. When I was with
>> Michael F.
>> O'Shaughnessy he did tell me how the British stole food from the Irish
>> during the "potato famine". He said he was going to join the IRA, I
>> hope he
>> did at some point. That would have been the one good thing he did with
>> his
>> meaningless life. Because he sure hasn't given his daughter one dime, or
>> ever written letters and cards to know that he loves her. Which is almost
>> free by the way. For a man that walks around with a box of $100.00
>> Cohibas,
>> and the finest clothes and vehicles, that's pretty selfish.
>>
>
> And you bought all this bull****? Hook, Line and Sinker? Did he offer to
> sell you a bridge, too? My Dawg, you make me wonder just how stupid
> someone could be and still remember to breathe, much less fornicate.

I just want to know where I can buy a box of Cohibas for $100.

Gutterboy

[Veronique]

Gutterboy wrote:
> ChildFree Abby wrote:
> > Mandy Smith wrote:
> >
> >> ...For a man that walks around with a box of $100.00
> >> Cohibas,
> >> and the finest clothes and vehicles, that's pretty selfish.
> >>
> >
> > And you bought all this bull****? Hook, Line and Sinker? Did he
offer to
> > sell you a bridge, too? My Dawg, you make me wonder just how
stupid
> > someone could be and still remember to breathe, much less
fornicate.
>
> I just want to know where I can buy a box of Cohibas for $100.
>

Same place you buy Finest(TM) brand clothes and vehicles.


V., thinking one of those table vendors downtown.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep

[V]

"DaKitty" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Kari wrote:
> > Mandy Smith wrote:
> >
> > That's all there is to it. And
> > > Kari, when you have kids, then you are in a position to say
> something to me,
> > > & other moms and dads who try to provide for their Children when a
> deadbeat
> > > skips out.
> >
> >
> > I will always be smarter than you because I prefer to
> > think with my brain instead of my uterus. Unlike you,
> > I won't ever burden myself with kids--especially
> > illegitimate ones.
> >
> > Again, kill your kid, then yourself, then ****
> > the bodies.
> >
> >
> > Kari...NOT SORRY
>
> When the next deviant crime occurs, we'll know to look for Kari.
> Or maybe she speaks from experience already???
>

I am telling you.....she has got the MO for serial crimes.
V

--
Dysfunctional people are prepared for anything. Hey, once you've driven your
drunk father to Mom's parole hearing, what else is there?

[[email protected]]

In >
posted on Sat, 22 Jan 2005 21:02:56 -0500, J. Peter Mugaas
wrote:

>On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 00:12:56 GMT, wrote:
>
>>[snip]
>>Hmm, well, I wouldn't disagree with the abortion option, I
>>do believe that anyone in the world has a innate right to
>>approach any genuine support group for help and advice.
>>
>>Some on the group might want to offer practical suggestions,
>>but I don't believe that anyone on any support group has any
>>right to be deliberately hostile to a person seeking advice.
>>
>The person posted to the wrong support group. There probably is a
>more relevant newsgroup that could've been more helpful (it's the
>poster's responsibility to find the right one).

There may well have been, but a poster has a right to try to
maximize their chances by posting to several groups. Any of
the groups you mention might have someone with specific
experience in tracking someone, or could recommend a
specific service for doing so.

>
>I also suspect that the original poster may have been trolling by
>pitting one newsgroup against another by cross-posting to
>contradictory newsgroups. Look at the groups the original message was
>cross-posed to:
>
>alt.child-support
>alt.support.childfree
>alt.support.divorce
>alt.support.single-parents
>
>That's the crux of what's going on. While I've been following this
>thread, I've hesitated to reply to it before because I suspected a
>troll and yes, my news reader does warn if you are cross-posting a
>reply.

I don't believe that it is troll behaviour to post to more
than one newsgroup. Not everyone identifies the group they
are posting from and contactable on.

If someone posts something on the above groups I may wish to
answer the post or follow the thread. The only way that I
can ensure that my post reaches them is to crosspost back.

Crossposting is relatively common on most usenet groups, and
I fail to see why alt.support.childfree should be so damned
paranoid about it.

Now if someone is trying to sell a product or service on
usenet and crossposting to 15 or 20 unrelated groups hoping
to find a customer [or a sucker] then there may be some
reason to complain.

There are groups devoted for the sale of items, and I would
object to anyone trying to flog a product or service on a
non-sales group such as any of the above.

>The original poster was rightfully flamed for choosing the wrong
>newsgroup and she had EVERY opportunity to know that this is not the
>right group (we haven't been hiding it from anyone).

Sorry, I still maintain that anyone looking for help on any
group pretending to be a support group should not be flamed,
as we don't know their motive for posting.

.....Whether they are a clueless newbie or not.
>
>All those people you mention have absolutely nothing to do with this.
>This was either a troll attempting to get people riled up for their
>own sick pleasure

An unwarranted assumption. Why should crossposting get
anyone riled up?

I could probably set up a filter on Forte Agent to
automatically mark any crosspost as read or block it
entirely, but I see absolutely no reason to do either.

>or some clueless newbie who really doesn't know any
>better and needs to learn the hard way.

I agree that there are many people on many newsgroups who
need to be flamed or embarrassed into acting like human
beings, but I do think we should try to be a bit more gentle
with obvious newbies and give them the benefit of the doubt.

It doesn't really take long to get a good idea how long a
person has posted on usenet under a given name.

Why should a group want to get a reputation for being a hate
group?

If alt.support.childfree is so damn fussy about crossposts
they should convert to a moderated group or exchange
messages by email. The world is _not_ going to operate for
the convenience of this group.

This reply restores the thread crossposts. Why attempt to
talk behind others backs, Peter?

IMHO, if you and/or others are going to criticize the
original poster, she has a right to know of your
speculations on her motives.

Regards,
"nilkids"

>
>---
>I once had an open mind until people used it as a trashcan.
>J. Peter Mugaas E-Mail:
>http://www.wvnet.edu/~oma00215/

[[email protected]]

In > posted on
Mon, 24 Jan 2005 22:43:16 GMT, The Dave© wrote:

>> Kari wrote:
>> Again, kill your kid, then yourself, then ****
>> the bodies.
>
>How does that work, genius?

Interesting question, that!

Isn't there an old military joke along the lines of an
officer lecturing to his troops
"No, no, men. First you rape, then you pillage, then you
burn the village!"

Or perhaps Kari has some special talents that the rest of us
lack? Or special Satanistic powers?

Or perhaps she is talking of rape in the afterlife, not
this life?

Please do post details, Kari, am sure that all of us
following this thread would like to hear your answer to the
question posed by "The Dave©" >.

Some of us do like to try to learn from usenet, after all!
:-)

Regards,
"nilkids"

Regards,
"nilkids"

[[email protected]]

In > posted on
Mon, 24 Jan 2005 16:29:16 -0400, ChildFree Abby wrote:

>Mandy Smith wrote:
>> Oh, I had no idea that Kari had family in the UK too. And yes while you're
>> at it, you can get on your knees and bow down. When I was with Michael F.
>> O'Shaughnessy he did tell me how the British stole food from the Irish
>> during the "potato famine". He said he was going to join the IRA, I hope he
>> did at some point. That would have been the one good thing he did with his
>> meaningless life. Because he sure hasn't given his daughter one dime, or
>> ever written letters and cards to know that he loves her. Which is almost
>> free by the way. For a man that walks around with a box of $100.00 Cohibas,
>> and the finest clothes and vehicles, that's pretty selfish.
>>
>
>And you bought all this bull****? Hook, Line and Sinker? Did he offer to
>sell you a bridge, too? My Dawg, you make me wonder just how stupid
>someone could be and still remember to breathe, much less fornicate.
>
>You are dumber than a box of hair. You are a disgrace to the human
>species.

There, there, Abby, calm down! Firstly, even intelligent
people have been known to make major mistakes, usually as
the result of excessive optimism.

Secondly, do you think that Vietnam was a wise decision?
Would you want to go on record as claiming that the
administrations involved in the conflict or the American
voters who supported them as "dumb"? Don't you think that
"misled" might be a more tolerant term?

Even some of the people posting on this thread have some
people on it whose intelligence is pretty questionable.

Some still accuse me of being anything other than a male
in both sex and gender. Many hate Christians. Some accuse
me of being a liar.

Not all of these people are on the crosspost threads.
Personally I would have to question the intelligence of some
who only post on alt.support.childfree.

As am in a fairly good mood at the moment, so I won't
mention any names, but am sure that they know who they are.
:-)

IMHO, none of this behaviour shows signs of even average
intelligence, let alone superior intelligence.

The average IQ of humans by definition is 100, and the
distribution follows the traditional bell-shaped curve.

As almost anyone who wants computer access these days can
manage it, we have to expect a certain percentage of people
with moderate to severe problems.

Regards,
"nilkids"



>
>ChildFree Abby

[DaKitty]

"V" > wrote in message
...
>
> "DaKitty" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > Kari wrote:
> > > Mandy Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > That's all there is to it. And
> > > > Kari, when you have kids, then you are in a position to say
> > something to me,
> > > > & other moms and dads who try to provide for their Children when a
> > deadbeat
> > > > skips out.
> > >
> > >
> > > I will always be smarter than you because I prefer to
> > > think with my brain instead of my uterus. Unlike you,
> > > I won't ever burden myself with kids--especially
> > > illegitimate ones.
> > >
> > > Again, kill your kid, then yourself, then ****
> > > the bodies.
> > >
> > >
> > > Kari...NOT SORRY
> >
> > When the next deviant crime occurs, we'll know to look for Kari.
> > Or maybe she speaks from experience already???
> >
>
> I am telling you.....she has got the MO for serial crimes.
> V

No kidding. I can't fathom a normal woman saying such a thing, even in jest.
Someone must have done a number on this one for her to turn out that way.
Looks like sociopathic tendencies.

[ino paycs]

I assure you Kenneth, I'm not Mandy. Posing as someone else isn't my
style.

As for Mandy, my advice for her is, next time she meets a tall dark and
handsome stranger is to keep her panties on and legs together.
Ino PayCS

[tom c]

> wrote in message
...
> >Don't bother, she won't answer your call dickless.
> ^Tis a job your better suited for anyway...
>
> Nutered chicken****.

ow I am so wounded by a dickless wonder that's sharp as a bowling ball and
about as bright. What's a matter cupcake, even your hands turn you down for
a date?

[Rambler]

tom c wrote:
> > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>>Don't bother, she won't answer your call dickless.
>>
>>^Tis a job your better suited for anyway...
>>
>>Nutered chicken****.
>
>
> ow I am so wounded by a dickless wonder that's sharp as a bowling ball

That would be "that's *as* sharp as a bowling ball" - bowling ball.

Rambler

[Kenneth S.]

"ino paycs" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I assure you Kenneth, I'm not Mandy. Posing as someone else isn't my
> style.
>
> As for Mandy, my advice for her is, next time she meets a tall dark and
> handsome stranger is to keep her panties on and legs together.
> Ino PayCS
>

Well, you can understand my suspicions, can't you, Ino? I mean this
Mandy person seemed such a caricature of a woman who thinks of herself as
the poor downtrodden victim of some man. I felt sure she was invented by you
or some other man -- in hopes of either amusing us all or provoking someone
into an unreasoning fury.

And as for your advice to the Mandy person -- you'd better hope that it
isn't overheard by any of those Brazilian women in string bikinis who are
lounging around near you on Copacabana Beach. What would be the point of
tall, dark, and handsome men like me coming down there if you persuade the
string bikini-ed women to think that way? Keep your advice under your hat!

[Mandy Smith]

I wish there were more people like you in the World DA Kitty. You are a well
rounded person, these days that's rare.


Thanks,
Mandy



"DaKitty" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> When the next deviant crime occurs, we'll know to look for Kari.
> Or maybe she speaks from experience already???
>

[Veronique]

Mandy Smith wrote:


> You had better pray that God not strike you dead, for your cold,
black heart
> Kari. That's probably why he gave you a Sterile womb, because he
knows that
> you would go Susan Smith on your children.

So Mandy, ol' gal, if god loves children so damn much, why'd he give
them to Susan Smith?


V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep

[Mandy Smith]

I was young and foolish then, it will never happen again ! I warn my
daughter about men now. I don't want to see her get hurt by some jerk
asshole.


Sincerely,
Mandy





"ino paycs" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I assure you Kenneth, I'm not Mandy. Posing as someone else isn't my
> style.
>
> As for Mandy, my advice for her is, next time she meets a tall dark and
> handsome stranger is to keep her panties on and legs together.
> Ino PayCS
>

[thebestcooker]

Ha ha Mandy, your White Trash ass just got burned ! You ****ing bitch,
you were TOLD to leave Michael F. O'Shaughnessy alone. He doesn't want
you, or ANY of his ex bitch baby mamas. You all want to hop in the sack
with him at the drop of a hat, then when you pop a baby out that pussy
you blame the guy ? How ****ed up is that ? Get a ****ing clue bitch,
wear a rubber, use your brain. Kari is right, you are a stupid ****ing
****. And like I said, "he is NOT yours anymore". Now get to stepping
before I find you and cook you up in a new dish. Stay out of New York
bitch, you come here I will teach you a lesson. You can count on that,
Mike is NOT yours. He NEVER was either, you were just his playtoy while
he was in College probably.







Sassy wrote:
> This guy probably is not a dead Beat dad. Repeat, is not! He probably
is
> out there enjoying his life with a new family. Leave him alone and
live
> your life the way you want. The way it sounds , your trying to cause
> problems. Find a different guy to adopt this child. Enough said and
> done. Your child will grow up much better with a dad she knows,
rather
> than waisting your time looking for someone that wants nothing to do
> with you or this child. By the way, It is your opinion that this
guy
> is a deadbeat asshole. We don't know him . So how do we know this is
> true? That is like someone posting something saying, "that Mandy
(what
> ever) is a Deadbeat Bitch"! You need to grow up. I hope he is out
there
> telling everyone that you are a Deadbeat Slut. What comes around,
Goes
> around!

[Jason G]

In article <1106756107.d2bd7eba0aef4e24de823a8400dc0d46@terane ws>, Mandy Smith
says...
>
>I OTOH, would give my life for my daughter.

Prove it!


--
Jason G
"This isn't a matter of being tolerant;
it's a matter of being sane." --REP, a.s.c.

[tom c]

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
news:1106586781.0ea6541b76cef04170c605d4940083b2@t eranews...
> Oh, I had no idea that Kari had family in the UK too. And yes while you're
> at it, you can get on your knees and bow down. When I was with Michael
> F.
> O'Shaughnessy he did tell me how the British stole food from the Irish
> during the "potato famine". He said he was going to join the IRA,


Try reading some Tim Pat Coogan you clueless bint. And fall through your
asshole and hang yourself right after.


Tom C

[tom c]

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
news:1106756107.d2bd7eba0aef4e24de823a8400dc0d46@t eranews...

You know, this was a bad troll to begin but it's sinking lower all the time.
It's obvious this story is neither real or creative.
Recipes
Straight outta da Coal Region kitchen!

Bethlehem Cookies
7 cups flour
2 cups lard (one pound)
6 egg yolks
1 pint sour cream
2 tsp baking soda
3 lb of nuts to 1 box xxxx sugar

Mix all and put to freeze overnight. Roll out the next day in powder sugar
instead of flour. Spread with ground nuts or poppy seed. Roll and bake until
tops are nicely browned.

[Mandy Smith]

You're the only troll here Tom. And I don't care whether you believe me or
not. It is real, and he is a deadbeat. And if you can't understand, then
that's your problem. I hope in a future life, your Karma has you being
reborn as his child...


M.S.





"tom c" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
> news:1106756107.d2bd7eba0aef4e24de823a8400dc0d46@t eranews...
>
> You know, this was a bad troll to begin but it's sinking lower all the
time.
> It's obvious this story is neither real or creative.
> Recipes
> Straight outta da Coal Region kitchen!
>
> Bethlehem Cookies
> 7 cups flour
> 2 cups lard (one pound)
> 6 egg yolks
> 1 pint sour cream
> 2 tsp baking soda
> 3 lb of nuts to 1 box xxxx sugar
>
> Mix all and put to freeze overnight. Roll out the next day in powder sugar
> instead of flour. Spread with ground nuts or poppy seed. Roll and bake
until
> tops are nicely browned.
>
>

[tom c]

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message

Recipes
Straight outta da Coal Region kitchen!

Bleenies - Fried potato pancakes
8 medium potatoes
1 medium onion, grated
1 egg
Salt & pepper
4 level tbsp. flour

In Europe and Russia, bleenies (or "blinis") are regular flour
pancakes and are served with caviar. In the Coal Region, a bleenie is a
potato pancake. Few people make them at home since they can create a huge
greasy mess in your kitchen (and your whole house). That's why they are
popular at block parties and church bazaars. Bleenie lines have been known
to circle halfway around the block.

Peel and grate potatoes. Mix potatoes and all other ingredients
together. Flatten like pancakes. Fry. Add salt to taste after cooking. Some
people put vinegar on before eating, others smear on some grape or
strawberry jelly. See photo.

Warning: When cooking, be very careful with the grease. "Oy,
Yezus, you could set yer house on fire!"

Another Bleenie recipe
4 potatoes (grate on fine grater)
2 eggs
1 onion (grated with the potatoes)
2 or 3 tbsp. flour
Cooking oil

Mix all ingredients. Spoon mixture into the hot oil (do put too
much oil in the pan; just enough to cover the bleenies as they fry). When
they are lightly browned on one side, gently turn bleenies to fry the other
side. Serve with salt or vinegar. Good with sour cream or pork & beans.
Hint: Drain potatoes thru a colander to make a much firmer
bleenie.

[Ezzy]

God doesn't strike people dead. Only xtian fundie tards think things
like that.

If you'd give your life for your offspring, do everyone a favor
including her, kill yourself now.

Ezzy
ps: thanks for the laugh.

[[email protected]]

In > posted on 26 Jan
2005 14:13:17 -0800, Jason G wrote:

>In article . com>, Terry Lomax
>says...
>>
>>Caine is a breeder. In a recent post, she admitted to having gotten
>>herself pregnant.
>
>>Once a moo, always a moo, whether it's only a few minutes after
>>conception or living with offspring who stay at home into adulthood.
>
>Wow, you're totally outta your tree on this one, Lomax.
>
>Even that flamin' CF liberal Pete wouldn't make that call. You're muddleheading
>up two unrelated issues.
>
>Of course, I've ****ed mothers in the past so I guess I'm a breeder too?

Um, always a possibility. Unfortunately if you try to be an
asshole, there is no assurance that any of your children
would inheret your defects.

Perhaps the only way to scientifically resolve this would be
to run a genetic analysis on all newborn individuals, which
could establish the genetic father and mother.

Then the provable father and mother could be analyzed for
possibly genetic defects, including psychological defects,
and the offspring could be monitored for these.

Of course, this gets into the nature/nurture controversy.

Perhaps it is not possible for Jason to raise a "normal"
child, but we couldn't determine why at the moment.

Of course, there is the remote possibility that Jason has,
or could have, raised a "normal" child.

If so, can we have some proof that this child was never
arrested for any offense, or is this too much to ask?

Regards,
"nilkids"

[Virginia]

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
news:1106756107.d2bd7eba0aef4e24de823a8400dc0d46@t eranews...
> I OTOH, would give my life for my daughter. >

Oh, and aren't you just the most wonderful saint every and we should all bow
down and worship. Ya know, little miss super mom, why don't you take the
time you're spending here and invest it in your oh-so-precious DD. You're
stealing valuable time away from her. Ta ta now.

va :)

[Veronique]

Kenneth S. wrote:
> Oh, look, come on, "Mandy Smith." You're over the top in your effort
to
> pose as a self-centered, self-righteous victim-feminist of very
limited
> intelligence. The "lack of compassion and humanity" combined with
your
> invitation to God to strike someone dead? It's too much, and it's
not
> convincing.
>
> Who are you really?
She's Michael O'Shaughnessy, of course!


V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep

[mroo philpott-smythe]

"DaKitty" > wrote in news:1106603081.599958.167100
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
> Kari wrote:
>> Mandy Smith wrote:


>> That's all there is to it. And
>> > Kari, when you have kids, then you are in a position to say
> something to me,
>> > & other moms and dads who try to provide for their Children when a
> deadbeat
>> > skips out.

You should've thought about that before ****ing without protection, you
dumb ****. Who held a gun to your head and forcibly impregnated you, eh?

>> I will always be smarter than you because I prefer to
>> think with my brain instead of my uterus. Unlike you,
>> I won't ever burden myself with kids--especially
>> illegitimate ones.
>> Again, kill your kid, then yourself, then ****
>> the bodies.

> When the next deviant crime occurs, we'll know to look for Kari.
> Or maybe she speaks from experience already???

Listen, Ms. "I did two hours of psych in community college," most deviant
crimes are committed by parents against their - or someone else's -
children.

Go read a better quality of books, you dumb ****.

sq, "They're breeding them for stupidity these days"

[mroo philpott-smythe]

"V" > wrote in
:
> "DaKitty" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Kari wrote:
>> > Mandy Smith wrote:


>> > That's all there is to it. And
>> > > Kari, when you have kids, then you are in a position to say
>> something to me,
>> > > & other moms and dads who try to provide for their Children when
>> > > a deadbeat
>> > > skips out.>> >

Of course, the dumb bitch couldn't have held that aspirin between her
knees - I hear it's the best birth control.

>> > I will always be smarter than you because I prefer to
>> > think with my brain instead of my uterus. Unlike you,
>> > I won't ever burden myself with kids--especially
>> > illegitimate ones.

>> > Again, kill your kid, then yourself, then ****
>> > the bodies.

>> When the next deviant crime occurs, we'll know to look for Kari.
>> Or maybe she speaks from experience already???

> I am telling you.....she has got the MO for serial crimes.
> V

> --
> Dysfunctional people are prepared for anything. Hey, once you've
> driven your drunk father to Mom's parole hearing, what else is there?

Someone with *your* sig shouldn't be worrying about anyone else's MO, you
stupid ****.

sq

[mroo philpott-smythe]

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in
news:1106770858.de2b6bb5693b628553f95adf47fc99b7@t eranews:

> You're the only troll here Tom. And I don't care whether you believe
> me or not. It is real, and he is a deadbeat. And if you can't
> understand, then that's your problem. I hope in a future life, your
> Karma has you being reborn as his child...

Hey, wow, she said Karma! Mandy, don't you know that Jeebus does NOT
believe in Karma??? You're going straight to hell, girl!

sq, "Is this a handbasket?"

[Catty One]

> wrote in message
...
>>
> Hey, you seem to fail to understand! Even overseas
> Americans are not really welcome on this group if they
> refuse to kiss the ass of Caine and others.

Jesus-Tap-Dancing-Christ ... nil, you are OBSESSED ...
get over it
relax
there is no ass kissing on here, at least nobody ever bent over and asked me
to kiss their virtual butts
sheesh

>
> .. However, will hasten to tell you that you aren't the only
> one who is extremely ****ed off at not being accepted.
>
> I am not only CF and American but am older than most of the
> children on this group who reject me. Old enough to be
> their father or in some cases even their ****ing
> grandfather.
>
> Either of which is one of the better arguments for rejection
> of such spoiled children.
>
> Offhand, can you think of any better ones?
>
>>
>>http://members.aol.com/xpus/Britbounds.html
>>
>>
>>
>><yet again ducking - and running - very fast>
>>
> Perhaps not fast enough if you want to escape logic.
>>
>>Tom C
>>
>>PS: How do I find these looney sites?
>>
> Dunno. Perhaps you tend to be a masochist? ...You seem
> intelligent enough otherwise. :-)
>
> Regards,
> "nilkids"

[Catty One]

Roger, is that you?

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
news:1106586781.0ea6541b76cef04170c605d4940083b2@t eranews...
> Oh, I had no idea that Kari had family in the UK too. And yes while you're
>

[Catty One]

Hey Mandy
http://golfdevil.co.uk/cry.wav

that's all I can hear while reading your little pitiful paragraph below.

"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
news:1106770858.de2b6bb5693b628553f95adf47fc99b7@t eranews...
> You're the only troll here Tom. And I don't care whether you believe me or
> not. It is real, and he is a deadbeat. And if you can't understand, then
> that's your problem. I hope in a future life, your Karma has you being
> reborn as his child...
>
>
> M.S.
>
>
>
>
>
> "tom c" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
>> news:1106756107.d2bd7eba0aef4e24de823a8400dc0d46@t eranews...
>>
>> You know, this was a bad troll to begin but it's sinking lower all the
> time.
>> It's obvious this story is neither real or creative.
>> Recipes
>> Straight outta da Coal Region kitchen!
>>
>> Bethlehem Cookies
>> 7 cups flour
>> 2 cups lard (one pound)
>> 6 egg yolks
>> 1 pint sour cream
>> 2 tsp baking soda
>> 3 lb of nuts to 1 box xxxx sugar
>>
>> Mix all and put to freeze overnight. Roll out the next day in powder
>> sugar
>> instead of flour. Spread with ground nuts or poppy seed. Roll and bake
> until
>> tops are nicely browned.
>>
>>
>
>

[Catty One]

Ooop, there it is.
Head. Explode.
Breed=Kid=Breeder=Asshat


"Mandy Smith" > wrote in message
news:1106333839.1ad627b27a591591c0f99116ffbc7a34@t eranews...
> Kari, you don't know me first of all, secondly I'm not a breeder. I only
> have one child, you probably have none. Is this the way you treat someone
> that needs help ? You have a very cold, evil, and dark soul, I recommend
> professional help for your lack of humanity.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Kari" > wrote in message
> news:ynXHd.10340$HT6.4245@trnddc04...
>> Mandy Smith wrote:
>>
>> > Hello,
>>
>>
>>
>> You've come to the wrong place breeder troll. You did this
>> to yourself and deserve every bit of what you've got. I
>> just hate being one of the people paying for your mistake.
>>
>> A really great solution to your self-inflicted problem is
>> to go kill your illegitimate kid, then yourself, then
>> **** the bodies...as Pete would say.
>
>

[Father of the Year]

new to group. What is a deadbeat dad?
"Bradley" > wrote in message
...
> In article <1106263808.8ec7165ddd12fb42d3dd2345f9e85bb1@terane ws>,
says...
> >
> <snip breeder whining>
>
> It's amazing what you get when you Google keywords like
> 'free', 'child' and 'support' ain't it?
>
> --
> Bradley
>
> "Xanax my ass--I need automatic weapons!" - Mytoysdammit; a.s.c.
>

[flinrius]

I was wondering what a Deadbeat Mom is???

"Father of the Year" > wrote in message
...
> new to group. What is a deadbeat dad?
> "Bradley" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In article <1106263808.8ec7165ddd12fb42d3dd2345f9e85bb1@terane ws>,
> says...
>> >
>> <snip breeder whining>
>>
>> It's amazing what you get when you Google keywords like
>> 'free', 'child' and 'support' ain't it?
>>
>> --
>> Bradley
>>
>> "Xanax my ass--I need automatic weapons!" - Mytoysdammit; a.s.c.
>>
>
>

[Rambler]

Father of the Year wrote:
> new to group. What is a deadbeat dad?

it is usually somebody who has been flailed to a ninch of their life by
being accused of being insensitive to their child's needs while in fact
they are struggling to put food on the table for themselves whilest
being commanded to make good sized (for their incomes) support payments.

I typically refer to it as "Beat Dad Dead" in my affidavits, and yes,
the ex has thrown that term around to everybody, kids included.

Rambler

[xkatx]

"Rambler" > wrote in message
...
> Father of the Year wrote:
>> new to group. What is a deadbeat dad?
>
> it is usually somebody who has been flailed to a ninch of their life by
> being accused of being insensitive to their child's needs while in fact
> they are struggling to put food on the table for themselves whilest being
> commanded to make good sized (for their incomes) support payments.

No, not always. That sure might be the case sometimes, but other times a
deadbeat parent could be just that. Sometimes a deadbeat parent just
doesn't feel they need to live up to their parenting responsibilities.
That's not always meaning money wise. I would consider a deadbeat parent as
someone who just does nothing. I'm sorry, it doesn't take much money to
spend some time with your own child and show them love and that they are, in
fact, a human being. There's a lot of 'parents' - both mothers AND
fathers - who just don't give a damn. It goes both ways, but it seems that
you just hear about the dads more than the moms. There's selfish parents
both ways, and it's not fair to say that every parent who cannot afford to
support their children is a deadbeat. It does go so much further than that,
because there's also lots of parents who choose not to help with their
children and have more than enough means to survive well, while helping out
financially with their children.
Support payments are only a part of a child's needs.

> I typically refer to it as "Beat Dad Dead" in my affidavits, and yes, the
> ex has thrown that term around to everybody, kids included.

I don't agree with that. I, personally, believe whatever I think and feel
negatively about my ex stays to myself, or to the ears of MY friends/family
without the ears of my children around. I have never once said a single
negative word about my sons' father for them to hear, nor have I ever said
anything negative to someone who would pass my words on to them. There are
a lot of parents, as well, who do the same, and then on the other hand,
there are some who have no problem insulting their child's other parent and
vocalize whatever anger they may have. I do believe, in every way possible,
that this is so wrong and unfair to the child, even more to the other half
of that child.

> Rambler

[Rambler]

xkatx wrote:
> "Rambler" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Father of the Year wrote:
>>
>>>new to group. What is a deadbeat dad?
>>
>>it is usually somebody who has been flailed to a ninch of their life by
>>being accused of being insensitive to their child's needs while in fact
>>they are struggling to put food on the table for themselves whilest being
>>commanded to make good sized (for their incomes) support payments.
>
>
> No, not always. That sure might be the case sometimes, but other times a
> deadbeat parent could be just that. Sometimes a deadbeat parent just
> doesn't feel they need to live up to their parenting responsibilities.
> That's not always meaning money wise. I would consider a deadbeat parent as
> someone who just does nothing. I'm sorry, it doesn't take much money to
> spend some time with your own child and show them love and that they are, in
> fact, a human being. There's a lot of 'parents' - both mothers AND
> fathers - who just don't give a damn. It goes both ways, but it seems that
> you just hear about the dads more than the moms. There's selfish parents
> both ways, and it's not fair to say that every parent who cannot afford to
> support their children is a deadbeat. It does go so much further than that,
> because there's also lots of parents who choose not to help with their
> children and have more than enough means to survive well, while helping out
> financially with their children.
> Support payments are only a part of a child's needs.
>
>
>>I typically refer to it as "Beat Dad Dead" in my affidavits, and yes, the
>>ex has thrown that term around to everybody, kids included.
>
>
> I don't agree with that. I, personally, believe whatever I think and feel
> negatively about my ex stays to myself, or to the ears of MY friends/family
> without the ears of my children around. I have never once said a single
> negative word about my sons' father for them to hear, nor have I ever said
> anything negative to someone who would pass my words on to them. There are
> a lot of parents, as well, who do the same, and then on the other hand,
> there are some who have no problem insulting their child's other parent and
> vocalize whatever anger they may have. I do believe, in every way possible,
> that this is so wrong and unfair to the child, even more to the other half
> of that child.

Always two sides to a coin. My ex would evidently be the opposite side
of the coin to you.

but leaving you and me out of it, the studies that I have heard of and
read indicate that a very small minority of fathers don't pay the child
support ordered when they fully have the means to. The vast majority of
no-payors are those that cannot afford it due to either unemployment,
health or an order being set outside of their earning potential. Those
that pay what they can *are still* labeled deadbeat dads.

Flip that around a second, not according to you and me, but according
again to the studies I have read and heard of. The vast majority (89%?)
of custody decisions go to mothers, which means the vast majority (89%)
of child maintenance payors are fathers. Out of the 11% of mothers who
are supposed to be paying child support, a much greater number (over 30%
comes to mind) are "dead beat Mom's" than are the fathers (1 to 2%) who
are "dead beat Dads," yet you don't hear the phrase "Dead Beat Mom" do you?

But those are just the studies.

Rambler

[V]

"Rambler" > wrote in message
...
> xkatx wrote:
>> "Rambler" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>Father of the Year wrote:
>>>
>>>>new to group. What is a deadbeat dad?
>>>
>>>it is usually somebody who has been flailed to a ninch of their life by
>>>being accused of being insensitive to their child's needs while in fact
>>>they are struggling to put food on the table for themselves whilest being
>>>commanded to make good sized (for their incomes) support payments.
>>
>>
>> No, not always. That sure might be the case sometimes, but other times a
>> deadbeat parent could be just that. Sometimes a deadbeat parent just
>> doesn't feel they need to live up to their parenting responsibilities.
>> That's not always meaning money wise. I would consider a deadbeat parent
>> as someone who just does nothing. I'm sorry, it doesn't take much money
>> to spend some time with your own child and show them love and that they
>> are, in fact, a human being. There's a lot of 'parents' - both mothers
>> AND fathers - who just don't give a damn. It goes both ways, but it
>> seems that you just hear about the dads more than the moms. There's
>> selfish parents both ways, and it's not fair to say that every parent who
>> cannot afford to support their children is a deadbeat. It does go so
>> much further than that, because there's also lots of parents who choose
>> not to help with their children and have more than enough means to
>> survive well, while helping out financially with their children.
>> Support payments are only a part of a child's needs.
>>
>>
>>>I typically refer to it as "Beat Dad Dead" in my affidavits, and yes, the
>>>ex has thrown that term around to everybody, kids included.
>>
>>
>> I don't agree with that. I, personally, believe whatever I think and
>> feel negatively about my ex stays to myself, or to the ears of MY
>> friends/family without the ears of my children around. I have never once
>> said a single negative word about my sons' father for them to hear, nor
>> have I ever said anything negative to someone who would pass my words on
>> to them. There are a lot of parents, as well, who do the same, and then
>> on the other hand, there are some who have no problem insulting their
>> child's other parent and vocalize whatever anger they may have. I do
>> believe, in every way possible, that this is so wrong and unfair to the
>> child, even more to the other half of that child.
>
> Always two sides to a coin. My ex would evidently be the opposite side of
> the coin to you.
>
> but leaving you and me out of it, the studies that I have heard of and
> read indicate that a very small minority of fathers don't pay the child
> support ordered when they fully have the means to. The vast majority of
> no-payors are those that cannot afford it due to either unemployment,
> health or an order being set outside of their earning potential. Those
> that pay what they can *are still* labeled deadbeat dads.
>
> Flip that around a second, not according to you and me, but according
> again to the studies I have read and heard of. The vast majority (89%?)
> of custody decisions go to mothers, which means the vast majority (89%) of
> child maintenance payors are fathers. Out of the 11% of mothers who are
> supposed to be paying child support, a much greater number (over 30% comes
> to mind) are "dead beat Mom's" than are the fathers (1 to 2%) who are
> "dead beat Dads," yet you don't hear the phrase "Dead Beat Mom" do
> you?snip
>
> But those are just the studies.
>
> Rambler

And they are accurate.
V

[T]

"xkatx" > wrote in

> because there's also lots of parents who choose not to help with their
> children and have more than enough means to survive well, while helping
> out financially with their children.

Please show me anyone in America who can afford CS rates?

Isn't it odd that every American screams at the top of their lungs when the
gas prizes go up by just a few cents and claim they can't afford trips or
vactions anymore. Imagine if their gas was hiked to $25/gallon and told they
had to use this gas or go to jail?

That's what it feels like for us that are working and can't afford these CS
rates!!!!!!

[xkatx]

"T" > wrote in message
k.net...
>
> "xkatx" > wrote in
>
>> because there's also lots of parents who choose not to help with their
>> children and have more than enough means to survive well, while helping
>> out financially with their children.
>
> Please show me anyone in America who can afford CS rates?

Please show me anywhere that states this applies to America only.

> Isn't it odd that every American screams at the top of their lungs when
> the gas prizes go up by just a few cents and claim they can't afford trips
> or vactions anymore. Imagine if their gas was hiked to $25/gallon and told
> they had to use this gas or go to jail?

Isn't it odd that, since you're making such a huge assumption and clumping a
huge amount of people into a single group, Americans will scream at the top
of their lungs over almost everything and anything. Food, clothing, love
and attention are a necessity for children. Gas and cars are a luxury.
Believe it or not. A person CAN live without their precious cars, but can
anyone survive long without the necessities of life?

> That's what it feels like for us that are working and can't afford these
> CS rates!!!!!!

Good for you for having a job. Aren't you special? There's custodial
parents who also work and barely make ends meet while trying to provide all
the can for their children. What's your point?

[Rambler]

'Kate wrote:

> Given that the greatest number of non-payers (by a wide margin) are
> fathers, why go after the mother?

This is a serious comment, yes? The reason why the greatest numbers of
non-payers, on a strictly numerical basis, are fathers *is because* the
greatest number of *all* payers, by a whopping margin are men. Take one
percent of a billion and you are going to come up with a larger number
than 50% of a thousand.

Now, switch those figures around, and all of a sudden, where custody
situations and child maintenance equal, you'd have, statistically
speaking, a population of 500 million non-payers as opposed to the
100,000 that you have now. The *reason* for this is that it has been my
personal experience that women are treated far more gently then men are
in this process.

Take a look at child access interference. Were that prosecuted to the
same extent that child maintenance is prosecuted, heck we'd have kids
growing up without parents, because both Mom and Dad would be in jail.

> But aside from that, mothers are
> listed in the non-payers listings when they are on websites and in the
> papers in many areas. If I were a NCF, I would be fighting the media
> to get rid of the term. Most of the people working in media who are
> in positions of power are men. Start writing them and telling them
> that you will refuse to buy their sponsor's products if they continue
> to malign NCF's.

Been there, doing that. The term is perhaps widespread by the media,
but it is consistently placed forward by advocate groups to keep the
terms in front of people. Take the term 'lesbianism.' Absolutely great
pr work on the group that advocated that. On the one hand, you've got
'gays' which are maligned because they are male homosexuals. On the
other you've got 'lesbians,' who in reality are merely female gays, but
the perception is much different, because their pr machine was better.

Take the Dead Beat Dad 'concept.' Again, a better pr machine. And it's
not the media. The system is continually reinforced through domestic
violence issues, child support issues. Oh, and if I recall correctly,
aren't the majority of voters women?

it is a gender thing only because a small part of one gender has made it
a gender thing. One can either evolve back to the centre which takes
time and pain, or revolt back to the centre. That's why you get people
making it into a *huge* gender thing, to push it back to the centre.
The problem with that is that a 'revolution' has an amazing tendancy of
pushing too far in the opposite direction.

Just my two kopeks worth.

Rambler

[John Riggs]

Where do I sign on in this revolution, general?


"Rambler" > wrote in message
...
|
| The problem with that is that a 'revolution' has an amazing tendancy of
| pushing too far in the opposite direction.
|
| Just my two kopeks worth.
|
| Rambler
|

[Cloaked]

<SNIP>

>
>>Take a look at child access interference. Were that prosecuted to the
>>same extent that child maintenance is prosecuted, heck we'd have kids
>>growing up without parents, because both Mom and Dad would be in jail.
>
>Hmm... man cheats on woman. Woman runs him down in the parking lot of
>the hotel where he was having sex with his mistress. Woman pleads "but
>you can't put me in jail, the children will be without a parent."
>

I am sure that arguement has been made somewhere at sometime!

Interesting that you immediately pull a stereotype in your example - a
very negative stereotype about men!

It never occurred to you that lots of women cheat on their husbands
and then divorce them AND take them to the cleaners???

Want to see if your example is nuts?? Reverse the genders and you will
immediately see how crazy the argument is!

>So... let me ask you... are you responding the way that you are
>because you're a man in that situation or because you think it's fair
>for everyone to be put in jail for not supporting children? Do you
>really think that this is "either/or" or is there another option
>wherein people actually support their own children and don't run out
>on payments *OR* children?
>

So you are accusing him of being a cheater? Rather presumptuous,
wouldn't you say? Sounds like something a femminist lawyer would come
out with.

I'll tell you what I think, I think that when the custodial parent -
usually the woman - interferes with court ordered access of the
non-custodial partent - usually the man - that the offender should
spend an automatic 7 nights in the crow-bar hotel. No exceptions. No
excuses. No trial. No appeal. Automatic done deal. 2nd offense?? 14
nights. 3rd offense??? 30 days. 4th Offense??? loss of custody.

Before you cry fowl and say it is so unfair, consider the "punsihment"
that a man may receive for "non-payment":

Cancellation of Passport
Loss of Drivers License
Imprisonment
Criminal Contempt Charges
Fines
Garnishment of wages
Revokation of Business License
Revokation of Professional Status
Loss of right to vote

The list goes on...

Sorry, from where I sit women do not undergo these indignities. And
when a woman choses to interfere with access, it is done so with
virtual impunity.

Why the onesided party???? Why should not women enjoy the same
persecution and prosecution as men??

Don't like it? How about telling your local politician to lighten up
of the "dead beat dad" crap - because that is all it is - crap. It is
spewed from the mouths of politicians because it sounds good to women
and the sole purpose is to garner part of the vote - it has nothing to
do with facts, reason, or justice.

The best option is to balance not just the laws, but the
implementation of those laws. Justice must not only be done, it must
be SEEN to be done! To balance, either women must suffer as men do, or
men's lot must be lightened to the same level that women are privy to.

Which would you prefer??

[Werebat]

'Kate wrote:

> Why is it that whenever you talk to men about these emotional things,
> they use personal experience? It's as if the rest of the world does
> not exist.

<Boggle>

I think *people* tend to go right to personal experience when discussing
emotional things. I mean it's not like women, by comparision, are more
likely to head right for the objective data when discussing emotional
issues. Come on.


>>Take a look at child access interference. Were that prosecuted to the
>>same extent that child maintenance is prosecuted, heck we'd have kids
>>growing up without parents, because both Mom and Dad would be in jail.
>
>
> Hmm... man cheats on woman. Woman runs him down in the parking lot of
> the hotel where he was having sex with his mistress. Woman pleads "but
> you can't put me in jail, the children will be without a parent."

I'm not sure what the relevance of this little vignette is.


> So... let me ask you... are you responding the way that you are
> because you're a man in that situation or because you think it's fair
> for everyone to be put in jail for not supporting children? Do you
> really think that this is "either/or" or is there another option
> wherein people actually support their own children and don't run out
> on payments *OR* children?

I think almost everyone here will agree that both parents should support
their children financially and emotionally. The Devil is in the details.

I don't beleive the OP was actually advocating that both parents should
be thrown in jail.

But you already know that, I think. The logic presented is pretty basic
stuff, and the only way I can see someone misreading it is if they are
being deliberately obfuscatory in an effort to confound other readers.


> Because being male is the be all end all as far as being top of the
> food chain.

That depends entirely on which "food chain" you are talking about. To
use a metaphor, a great white shark is not at the top of the food chain
in the middle of the Gobi desert. He's more of a sitting duck.
Environment plays a very significant factor.

In family court, men are most certainly not at "the top of the food
chain". To suggest otherwise is... well... nonsensical because it
flies in the face of so much data indicating the opposite.


> Take the women who leave their children or are not "given" custody of
> their children.... aren't they treated more harshly by society? They
> are automatically seen as bad mothers or crazy or drunks or drug
> abusers. We immediatly think, "What's wrong with her?" because it is
> not the norm.

You're right. Non-Custodial Moms are generally assumed to have done
something "wrong" in order to have "lost" custody. But what does that
say about the reality of the family court system? Is there
statistically anything behind it? What kind of women lose custody
cases? If I were a gambling man, I'd bet that there were would be a
significantly higher percentage who were "bad mothers", "crazy",
"drunks", and "drug abusers" than the equivalent for men who lost
custody disputes. Of course I *could* be wrong, but I don't think so.


> Take the men who have custody or are widowed. They are
> treated like idiots who don't know how to parent their own children.

Eh? I have my son half of the time and I don't recall ever being
treated like an idiot who didn't know how to parent. Are you citing a
study here, or just going on personal experience?


> They are offered far more help than single women.

How?


> Single women are
> called welfare moms and treated like "you made your bed.
I don't
> declare "I'm a widow" immediately. . . you would be surprised at how
> many are ready to tell me how if I had been a good wife and mother, I
> wouldn't be in this situation.... even among fellow family therapist
> students the assumption is that I'm divorced or never married. And
> you know... what's it matter? The stiuation is the same.

So you are upset that just because you are a single mother, people
assume you are freeloading off the system and feel animosity towards you
because of that. I guess I can see that. I certainly wouldn't like
that attitude directed at me either, if it weren't true of me (and
probably even if it were).

But where do you think the prejudice comes from?


> Ah, we all have our pet peeves don't we?

Sure do. And to be fair, is it really reasonable to expect anyone to
have as much of a conniption about a societal prejudice that hasn't and
isn't ever going to affect *them*, personally?


>>it is a gender thing only because a small part of one gender has made it
>>a gender thing.
>
>
> I can go either way as far as fairness but here's another side:
>
> It is a gender thing because judges, who were by and large male, had
> something called the tender years doctrine. The rise in the divorce
> rate is, in part, because of economic stress in the marriage. Money.
> Lack thereof. This trend became more pronounced in the late 1970's
> with the formation of OPEC and the drastic, almost overnight increase
> in crude oil prices. The rise in oil prices increased the price of
> commodities immediately - milk, bread, and other perishable goods.
> This, in turn, caused more and more mothers to need to work to help
> provide for the family. The middle class nearly perished. I believe
> that men were caught short trying to adjust to a family structure that
> was anything but the ideal Ozzie and Harriet home life. They grew
> angry and resentful.... probably for a good reason. Their fathers
> didn't exactly model the behaviors that they'd have to adopt to
> compensate for working mothers.

Well now I've never heard the connection between oil and divorce before.
Where'd you hear that one?

You work to explain the rise in divorce but the explanation has little
to do with the aforementioned "tender years" doctrine.


> I also think that wives would sacrifice their lives for their children
> before they would sacrifice their lives for their husbands. I believe
> that husbands would save their wives before their children. I don't
> know why that is but maybe it works survival-wise. Perhaps this,
> alone, accounts for the tender years doctrine. What's that famous
> painting of the mother whose baby was stolen and, when the judge said
> that they'd simply cut the baby in half, chose to give the child up to
> spare its life? Similar... but different.

It's a story of the wisdom of King Solomon. And for the record, I'm
sure I'd save my child before my spouse -- even my current one. That
just feels natural as a parent. Maybe I'm just a freak, who knows? :^/
Seems like we're both just talking "belief" here though.


>>One can either evolve back to the centre which takes
>>time and pain, or revolt back to the centre. That's why you get people
>>making it into a *huge* gender thing, to push it back to the centre.
>>The problem with that is that a 'revolution' has an amazing tendancy of
>>pushing too far in the opposite direction.
>>
>>Just my two kopeks worth.
>
>
> It's an interesting two kopecks, comrade. :-)
> I agree that the immediate reaction is often revolutionary and, over
> time, the pendulum swings until a liveable agreement is reached.

Well we're certainly not there at the moment.


> I
> don't agree that anyone is going to be happy about the result. If
> they were, we wouldn't need divorce and custody law.

No matter the system, some people are going to be unhappy about the
results. But there's a difference between "unhappy" and "abused".
Black slaves in the deep Southern USA were undoubtedly "unhappy" about
their situation, and I don't think an explanation of "Well, no matter
how we work things out, SOMEONE will be unhappy..." could ever have
smoothed over their grievances. I'll tell you, as a victim of this
system, that kind of palliative talk only infuriates me.

- Ron ^*^

[Kent]

Why the FK is this crossposted to alt.support.childfree? We don't have a dog
in this fight, and never will.


"Cloaked" > wrote in message
...
> <SNIP>
>
> >
> >>Take a look at child access interference. Were that prosecuted to the
> >>same extent that child maintenance is prosecuted, heck we'd have kids
> >>growing up without parents, because both Mom and Dad would be in jail.
> >
> >Hmm... man cheats on woman. Woman runs him down in the parking lot of
> >the hotel where he was having sex with his mistress. Woman pleads "but
> >you can't put me in jail, the children will be without a parent."
> >
>
> I am sure that arguement has been made somewhere at sometime!
>
> Interesting that you immediately pull a stereotype in your example - a
> very negative stereotype about men!
>
> It never occurred to you that lots of women cheat on their husbands
> and then divorce them AND take them to the cleaners???
>
> Want to see if your example is nuts?? Reverse the genders and you will
> immediately see how crazy the argument is!
>
> >So... let me ask you... are you responding the way that you are
> >because you're a man in that situation or because you think it's fair
> >for everyone to be put in jail for not supporting children? Do you
> >really think that this is "either/or" or is there another option
> >wherein people actually support their own children and don't run out
> >on payments *OR* children?
> >
>
> So you are accusing him of being a cheater? Rather presumptuous,
> wouldn't you say? Sounds like something a femminist lawyer would come
> out with.
>
> I'll tell you what I think, I think that when the custodial parent -
> usually the woman - interferes with court ordered access of the
> non-custodial partent - usually the man - that the offender should
> spend an automatic 7 nights in the crow-bar hotel. No exceptions. No
> excuses. No trial. No appeal. Automatic done deal. 2nd offense?? 14
> nights. 3rd offense??? 30 days. 4th Offense??? loss of custody.
>
> Before you cry fowl and say it is so unfair, consider the "punsihment"
> that a man may receive for "non-payment":
>
> Cancellation of Passport
> Loss of Drivers License
> Imprisonment
> Criminal Contempt Charges
> Fines
> Garnishment of wages
> Revokation of Business License
> Revokation of Professional Status
> Loss of right to vote
>
> The list goes on...
>
> Sorry, from where I sit women do not undergo these indignities. And
> when a woman choses to interfere with access, it is done so with
> virtual impunity.
>
> Why the onesided party???? Why should not women enjoy the same
> persecution and prosecution as men??
>
> Don't like it? How about telling your local politician to lighten up
> of the "dead beat dad" crap - because that is all it is - crap. It is
> spewed from the mouths of politicians because it sounds good to women
> and the sole purpose is to garner part of the vote - it has nothing to
> do with facts, reason, or justice.
>
> The best option is to balance not just the laws, but the
> implementation of those laws. Justice must not only be done, it must
> be SEEN to be done! To balance, either women must suffer as men do, or
> men's lot must be lightened to the same level that women are privy to.
>
> Which would you prefer??
>

[Rambler]

'Kate wrote:

> I don't understand how you don't understand but maybe the person to
> whom I'm responding will get it. He seemed intelligent. Let me take a
> stab at explaining this to you. The above case is the danger in
> generalizing one incident to all people. Not all women are murderers.
> Not all men cheat. That was my point. I guess you blinked.

Well, actually Kate, I didn't get it either, which is why I didn't
respond to your post. Your post to me was all over the place ...
somewhat confusing actually, so I guess I am not intelligent.

One thing I will respond to in your previous post is your point about
why *all* men seem to only speak about personal experiences. The reason
why I added the word personal to the experiences is to keep it tame.
from my conversations with married and divorced friends, from my reading
and basic research, the same point comes up again and again and again.
But I can only speak from what I *personally* know.

> BTW, the above case was fact. It did happen. The case above was fact.
> She killed *and* then plead for mercy because her children were made
> orphans. Ironic, huh?

Point?

>>It never occurred to you that lots of women cheat on their husbands
>>and then divorce them AND take them to the cleaners???
>
> Don't make me roll my eyes at you.

Here's where the whole thing cheapens, IMO. Bringing eye rolling is a,
what, passive aggressive putdown. It also conjurs up the image of the
poor female, at least to me.
>
> Men have also been known to throw away the stay-at-home wife for a
> more interesting, younger, career woman. See? There *are* two sides.
> I'm looking at them. You aren't. What is going on is that you're so
> use to fighting women that you can't see your way around the issue.
> I'm a woman; therefore, I'm taking a side; therefore, I'm wrong. Am I
> getting your point? If so, I think I will roll my eyes at you.

I didn't see Cloaked say that you were wrong. I saw him say that your
position was wrong. There is a difference. He might have been
gregarious in his choice of words, but he was, I think, focusing on the
position. In fact, his comment about how you or people should go to
their politicians and tell them to stop mouthing the "Beat Dad Dead"
homily I think underscored that point.

Btw, rolling your eyes cheapens that argument, in my opinion.

Rambler

[Rambler]

'Kate wrote:

>
> I believe that the media has a hard time
> beating women up in the same way that they feel free to beat men up
> but I don't think that adding women on to the deadbeat parent list is
> the appropriate response. I think that the appropriate response is
> that parents should support their children and then these lists would
> be unnecessary. But.. this isn't a perfect world, is it? I also know
> that in alt.support.single-parents, the term "deadbeat dad" is
> discouraged. It is in the monthly FAQ IIRC.

If you read that I was saying that everybody should be thrown in jail,
or that everybody should be a "deadbeat" then you read incorrectly.
Neither do I think it is possible to hop skip and jump from here to the
"appropriate response [being] that parents should support their children
and then these lists would be unecessary." These lists exist for people
who *do* support their children, so saying support your children and
we'll get rid of the list defies logic. Or reason. My initial point, a
point you indicate that you have read the studies on and agreed with, is
that the vast majority of people on these lists do not deserve to be on
them.

>>>Because being male is the be all end all as far as being top of the
>>>food chain.
>>
>>That depends entirely on which "food chain" you are talking about. To
>>use a metaphor, a great white shark is not at the top of the food chain
>>in the middle of the Gobi desert. He's more of a sitting duck.
>>Environment plays a very significant factor.
>
>
> Only if one lives in an environment that is totally unaffected by
> every other environment... a glass fishbowl, perhaps. Otherwise, we
> see and learn that the advantage tends to go to the men.

Then I guess that the family court system and the divorce system is a
glass fishbowl.

>
>>In family court, men are most certainly not at "the top of the food
>>chain". To suggest otherwise is... well... nonsensical because it
>>flies in the face of so much data indicating the opposite.
>
>
> Men were the ones who put other men in this position (male judges). To
> blame women for taking advantage of it is like blaming men for taking
> advantage of being at the top of the food chain. It exists. There are
> reasons why it exists as it does. They are not fair reasons.. not for
> either "side."

Really? You mean women didn't get the vote in the 20's after all, or
that all judges are over 105 years old?

So now it is the male judges who are the problem, not the court system,
not the social welfare officers, not the "tender years doctrine" which,
if I recall correctly, was supposed to have gone out in the 80's with a
series of conventions, and then re-writes of the guardianship and
custody laws in the 90's, but yet are still applied.

If you could show me an outlash from the female gender *against* this
thing, then I'd agree with you. But I don't see that, even though (at
least in here) many women do agree with equal access/custody types of
things.

> If that is so, then they are more likely to not pay the child support
> ordered. Those two pieces of the puzzle fit well. That's exactly why
> women who do want to be fair and share custody are condemned as nuts,
> drunks, drug abusers, and etc.

Fine. Then make the same argument the other way around. Those men who
aren't paying who are drug users, drunks and whatnot shouldn't be placed
on the "rolls" because of that? Doesn't fit.

> What backs up the statement that these women are *insert whatever
> issue* is that men have had to fight awfully hard to gain custody of
> their children. They have been forced to prove their ex's to be
> *insert whatever issue* or lose their children. They have had to do
> so using money to hire a private investigator or by getting medical
> records. Also, women are more likely to seek help for "emotional
> problems." Therefore, more women would be judged to be *insert
> whatever issue* in a court of law than men. Men have to prove they
> are better. Women have automatically won.

Don't follow this one at all.

> Many of us had money issues at the time. Money issues are one of the
> top three reasons why couples divorce. I was a recently married young
> adult at the time and expecting my oldest child.

Hmm ... I was always told that the money, sex, kids argument line was
false. Those were symptoms, not prolems.

>>You work to explain the rise in divorce but the explanation has little
>>to do with the aforementioned "tender years" doctrine.
>
>
> No.. that has to do with custody. The topic was child support and
> "deadbeat dads". One cannot be a deadbeat dad without a court order to
> pay. The number one reason for a custody dispute is divorce.

False. One is very easily labeled a "Beat Dead Dad." Courts do not
bestow that label. I would love to see the court order that says "And
so my Order is that Mr. So and So be a Dead Beat Dad." I have no Order
against me for anything, yet I am referred to repeatedly as a Dead Beat
Dad by the mother, by the ex-mother-in-law and my kids even bring it up
from time to time (or they used to).

I'll leave the throw away line at the end of your paragraph alone,
except to say, "relevance?"

> I know. But given a choice, I would rather work on keeping couples
> together than on the issue of how to divide assets and share custody.

laudable, but I don't think it can be done it "the Dark Side" becomes
fully understood. Carrot stick rationale.

Rambler

[T]

"Cloaked" > wrote in

> Before you cry fowl and say it is so unfair, consider the "punsihment"
> that a man may receive for "non-payment":
>
> Cancellation of Passport
> Loss of Drivers License
> Imprisonment
> Criminal Contempt Charges
> Fines
> Garnishment of wages
> Revokation of Business License
> Revokation of Professional Status
> Loss of right to vote
>
> The list goes on...

Yes isn't it interesting that a poor man gets the full weight of the law
thrown at him for something he has no control and yet the basic criminal
receives very little in the way of enforcement. Hold up a gas station and
you get a few months in jail, but you don't get 18 years of harrasement from
CSE and other agencies!

This is just a good old fashioned witch hunt!!!!!!!

[V]

"Cloaked" > wrote in message
...
> <SNIP>
>
>>
>
> So you are accusing him of being a cheater? Rather presumptuous,
> wouldn't you say? Sounds like something a femminist lawyer would come
> out with.
>
> snip

Hey, hey.....watch it....everyone move out of here.......there is nothing to
see here....psst....hey you...yeah..you mister...with the loin cloth and
knuckles dragging as you gait slowly....yeah...you...
Ahem...you gotta problem with feminist lawyers?
V, who is a feminist and working on being a lawyer

[V]

"Rambler" > wrote in message
...
snip> Btw, rolling your eyes cheapens that argument, in my opinion.
>
> Rambler

Do you not roll your eyes?
In person?
I do. Sometimes I kick out the 'whatever!'
It is a coping mechanism used in those moments when the other person just
simply won't or can't 'get it'!
No harm meant, I am sure.
V

[Rambler]

V wrote:
> "Cloaked" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>><SNIP>
>>
>>So you are accusing him of being a cheater? Rather presumptuous,
>>wouldn't you say? Sounds like something a femminist lawyer would come
>>out with.
>>
>>snip
>
>
> Hey, hey.....watch it....everyone move out of here.......there is nothing to
> see here....psst....hey you...yeah..you mister...with the loin cloth and
> knuckles dragging as you gait slowly....yeah...you...
> Ahem...you gotta problem with feminist lawyers?
> V, who is a feminist and working on being a lawyer

And there I thought you were practicing a stand-up routine.

Rambler

[Rambler]

'Kate wrote:

> And for a second, I thought you were, perhaps, willing to look at
> other sides of the issue. My bad. I see that this is just another
> "I'm right and you're a woman" posts.

I see. Good response. It would appear that you are unwilling to look
at other sides of this issue. Or any sides of this issue. My bad.

Has nothing to do with you being a woman or not. That is irrelevant,
except it seems to you. I can see where the soc.boys guys would have
fun with this, but that's not my purview.

Thanks for playing.

Rambler

[Rambler]

'Kate wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:35:32 +0800, Rambler
> > the following was posted in blue
> crayon:
>
>>Thanks for playing.
>>
>>Rambler
>
>
> LOL... sure. <wink>

Go ahead, you can have the last word. I know that is important to you.
Especially seeing as most of the other things you said were
unintelligible.

It's because I'm a man, isn't it, one of those horrible wretches who put
you in your current positon. I can take it .., I'm used to getting
picked on.

Rambler
(oh, just noticed your attribution line about "blue crayons." A great
way to subtly tell the person you're responding to that their comments
are childish. Works a lot better if you can get the grammar right, so
you might wish to change it from "the following was posted in blue
crayon" to "posted the following in blue crayon." besides, 'was posted'
is passive voice, which while it fits your style, is typically frowned
upon. But then, I shouldn't be commenting on grammar and spelling).

[Rambler]

'Kate wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:18:34 +0800, Rambler
> > the following was posted in blue
> crayon:
>
>
>>Go ahead, you can have the last word. I know that is important to you.
>
>
> What an angry man.

Come on, you've got to have a better last word than that, don't you? I
mean this one is so ... so ... transparent.

Not being able to answer a single thing, you delved quickly into name
calling. I mean, I figured as the self made representative of a
superior class, you could at least come up with something witty,
something stinging, something provocative or even downright intelligent,
as opposed to a trite fallback. Perhaps a huddle with V the feminist
lawyer want-to-be is in order. You can take the family therapist
student role, and she can take the law student role. (Oh, btw, if you
truly are studying to be a family therapist, I would think again ... way
to many issues and labels for you to be of help to somebody ... I mean,
wouldn't it be the angry men that you were trying to save to save
marriage ... or would those be a convenient excuse in your practive ...).

Come on, one more for the Gipper ....

Rambler

[rj]

Rambler wrote:
> 'Kate wrote:
> > On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:18:34 +0800, Rambler
> > > the following was posted in blue
> > crayon:
> >
> >
> >>Go ahead, you can have the last word. I know that is important to
you.
> >
> >
> > What an angry man.
>
> Come on, you've got to have a better last word than that, don't you?
I
> mean this one is so ... so ... transparent.
>
> Not being able to answer a single thing, you delved quickly into name

> calling. I mean, I figured as the self made representative of a
> superior class, you could at least come up with something witty,
> something stinging, something provocative or even downright
intelligent,
> as opposed to a trite fallback. Perhaps a huddle with V the feminist

> lawyer want-to-be is in order. You can take the family therapist
> student role, and she can take the law student role. (Oh, btw, if you

> truly are studying to be a family therapist, I would think again ...
way
> to many issues and labels for you to be of help to somebody ... I
mean,
> wouldn't it be the angry men that you were trying to save to save
> marriage ... or would those be a convenient excuse in your practive
....).
>
> Come on, one more for the Gipper ....
>
> Rambler

And Rambler...

<grin>

You're just as much to blame. Both of you... Cut out the condescension
and the cleverly-worded name-calling and go to your corners.

rj

[rj]

'Kate wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:18:34 +0800, Rambler
> > the following was posted in blue
> crayon:
>
> >Go ahead, you can have the last word. I know that is important to
you.
>
> What an angry man.
>
> 'Kate


sigh...

And what an angry woman.

I was finding this exchange to be both intelligent (a rarity on usenet)
and stimulating. Then somewhere along the way it degenerated into
finger-pointing and name-calling. A pity...

rj

[rj]

'Kate wrote:
> On 30 Mar 2005 23:02:07 -0800, "rj" > the
> following was posted in blue crayon:
>
> >
> >'Kate wrote:
> >> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:18:34 +0800, Rambler
> >> > the following was posted in blue
> >> crayon:
> >>
> >> >Go ahead, you can have the last word. I know that is important
to
> >you.
> >>
> >> What an angry man.
> >>
> >> 'Kate
> >
> >
> >sigh...
> >
> >And what an angry woman.
>
> Actually, I'm laughing at this. I can't believe his cover story.
It's
> too funny.
>
> >I was finding this exchange to be both intelligent (a rarity on
usenet)
> >and stimulating. Then somewhere along the way it degenerated into
> >finger-pointing and name-calling. A pity...
> >
> >rj
>
> Actually, I was too. Too bad Rambler couldn't keep up.
>
> 'Kate

Stop it, I say! Stop it!

rj

[Rambler]

'Kate wrote:
> On 30 Mar 2005 23:02:07 -0800, "rj" > the
> following was posted in blue crayon:
>
>
>>'Kate wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:18:34 +0800, Rambler
> the following was posted in blue
>>>crayon:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Go ahead, you can have the last word. I know that is important to
>>
>>you.
>>
>>>What an angry man.
>>>
>>>'Kate
>>
>>
>>sigh...
>>
>>And what an angry woman.
>
>
> Actually, I'm laughing at this. I can't believe his cover story. It's
> too funny.
>
>
>>I was finding this exchange to be both intelligent (a rarity on usenet)
>>and stimulating. Then somewhere along the way it degenerated into
>>finger-pointing and name-calling. A pity...
>>
>>rj

rj,

For some reason your posts are not getting through on my server (and
there it was I thought you were ignoring me). Just checked to make sure
I hadn't accidentally filtered you, and I haven't, so wondering if
you've changed servers or something? Thought I would point it out.

Rambler
(Ms. Gotalltheanswers' response isn't worth my time - still didn't get a
good last line from her though. I can see how one morphs over to "the
Dark Side" if that was the type of discourse one engages the opposite
gender in though. I'm glad ASD has some very intelligent and
knowledgable women in it).

[Rambler]

'Kate wrote:

> You obviously couldn't follow the original conversation, got all
> flustered, and attacked.
>
> Oh well.. that's usenet for ya [sic].

rofl ... actually, what you should perhaps do is go back up-thread seven
posts when, to refute an argument, you wrote "I see that this is just
another "I'm right and you're a woman" posts." You lost right there.
The argument, credibility. You name it.

Your follow-on responses continued to drill nails in your coffin,
terminating with how anybody that can hold a conversation that you can't
follow or understand due to a lack of experience is an "angry man" -
disingenuous.

Nobody was calling you names, even though you had been doing it to a
variety of posters with a "there is intelligent life out there" and "the
person I origninally responded to seemed intelligent." You have a
problem with intelligence it seems. You're not very subtle, and you are
very sarcastic. I know. I can be very sarcastic as well.

You had a discussion going, but it seems you couldn't keep up, so
instead it appears you went down the "I'm smarter than you and you're
just plain not listening because you're angry" route. Hey, that's fine
- you can operate in your own world. The only one that loses is you.

But for your own personal growth, I would suggest that you pull your
head out of your back pocket and take a strong look at the statements
that you are making ... and see how they apply to you. Not just from a
discussion standpoint, but from your interaction on an intimate level as
well. I can now better understand your comment about perhaps never
getting married again.

It's tough when you've got limited experience (I'll figure that you're
in your early/mid 20's) but even my 10 year old daughter has learned
calm discussion in emotional situations. We just had one of those and
she came through with absolute flying colours over a period of several
days, even though she and I were on opposites sides of the discussion
and she ultimately got what (she thinks) she wanted.

Good luck Kate. I really think you'll need it.

Rambler

[rj]

Rambler wrote:
> 'Kate wrote:
> > On 30 Mar 2005 23:02:07 -0800, "rj" > the
> > following was posted in blue crayon:
> >
> >
> >>'Kate wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:18:34 +0800, Rambler
> > the following was posted in blue
> >>>crayon:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Go ahead, you can have the last word. I know that is important
to
> >>
> >>you.
> >>
> >>>What an angry man.
> >>>
> >>>'Kate
> >>
> >>
> >>sigh...
> >>
> >>And what an angry woman.
> >
> >
> > Actually, I'm laughing at this. I can't believe his cover story.
It's
> > too funny.
> >
> >
> >>I was finding this exchange to be both intelligent (a rarity on
usenet)
> >>and stimulating. Then somewhere along the way it degenerated into
> >>finger-pointing and name-calling. A pity...
> >>
> >>rj
>
> rj,
>
> For some reason your posts are not getting through on my server (and
> there it was I thought you were ignoring me). Just checked to make
sure
> I hadn't accidentally filtered you, and I haven't, so wondering if
> you've changed servers or something? Thought I would point it out.

Nope. Nothing has changed.

I do post from both a personal dial-up account using a *good*
newsreader (when I'm at home) and also from a corporate account using
Google (like now).

>
> Rambler
> (Ms. Gotalltheanswers' response isn't worth my time - still didn't
get a
> good last line from her though. I can see how one morphs over to
"the
> Dark Side" if that was the type of discourse one engages the opposite

> gender in though. I'm glad ASD has some very intelligent and
> knowledgable women in it).

<wags finger>

Stop it, I say! Stop it!

rj

[Phil #3]

"V" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Cloaked" > wrote in message
> ...
>> <SNIP>
>>
>>>
>>
>> So you are accusing him of being a cheater? Rather presumptuous,
>> wouldn't you say? Sounds like something a femminist lawyer would come
>> out with.
>>
>> snip
>
> Hey, hey.....watch it....everyone move out of here.......there is nothing
> to see here....psst....hey you...yeah..you mister...with the loin cloth
> and knuckles dragging as you gait slowly....yeah...you...
> Ahem...you gotta problem with feminist lawyers?
> V, who is a feminist and working on being a lawyer
>
>

Speaking only for myself, admission of feminism completely eliminates
credibility.
Phil #3

[V]

"Phil #3" > wrote in message news:hGT2e.8212snip
>
> Speaking only for myself, admission of feminism completely eliminates
> credibility.
> Phil #3
>

Yes, speaking only for yourself. Anyone else agree with Phil #3?
V

[V]

"Rambler" > wrote in message
...
snip
>
> It's because I'm a man, isn't it, one of those horrible wretches who put
> you in your current positon. I can take it .., I'm used to getting picked
> on.
>
> Rambler
snip

Kate lost her husband to death.
We do not think men are bad people. Actually we love men who have
accountability.
Your childhood and being picked on has nothing to do with this group. Why
are you used to being picked on? You should seek therapy for being so darn
angry!
V

[V]

"Rambler" > wrote in message
...
> 'Kate wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:18:34 +0800, Rambler
>> > the following was posted in blue
>> crayon:
>>
>>
>>>Go ahead, you can have the last word. I know that is important to you.
>>
>>
>> What an angry man.
>
> Come on, you've got to have a better last word than that, don't you? I
> mean this one is so ... so ... transparent.
>
> Not being able to answer a single thing, you delved quickly into name
> calling. I mean, I figured as the self made representative of a superior
> class, you could at least come up with something witty, something
> stinging, something provocative or even downright intelligent, as opposed
> to a trite fallback. Perhaps a huddle with V the feminist lawyer
> want-to-be is in order. You can take the family therapist student role,
> and she can take the law student role. (Oh, btw, if you truly are studying
> to be a family therapist, I would think again ... way to many issues and
> labels for you to be of help to somebody ... I mean, wouldn't it be the
> angry men that you were trying to save to save marriage ... or would those
> be a convenient excuse in your practive ...).
>
> Come on, one more for the Gipper ....
>
> Rambler


I have a new name..."V the feminist lawyer want to be"
BAH.
I can not wait to tell my wittle fwends at the prescwool....I met a meanie
on usenet who dislike feminists lawyer wanna bes......
lol
V

[Cloaked]

I am not convinced that the admission eliminates credibility; however,
it does imply a defininte bias - and that comments and actions must be
closely examined for hidden agendas.

Just from casual observation, there was a time when femminism stood
for equality. Now, it appears that femminists want superiority. How
ironic that they would subscribe to a behaviour in themselves that
they profess to detest in men!

Hmmm.... perhaps they are closer to equality that they thought!

Too bad they could not have used this opporetunity to raise us all up
a notch!

But alas, they are achieving equality by reverting to the lowest
common denominator.

<sigh>


On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:19:57 GMT, "Phil #3" >
wrote:

>
>"V" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> "Cloaked" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> <SNIP>
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> So you are accusing him of being a cheater? Rather presumptuous,
>>> wouldn't you say? Sounds like something a femminist lawyer would come
>>> out with.
>>>
>>> snip
>>
>> Hey, hey.....watch it....everyone move out of here.......there is nothing
>> to see here....psst....hey you...yeah..you mister...with the loin cloth
>> and knuckles dragging as you gait slowly....yeah...you...
>> Ahem...you gotta problem with feminist lawyers?
>> V, who is a feminist and working on being a lawyer
>>
>>
>
>Speaking only for myself, admission of feminism completely eliminates
>credibility.
>Phil #3
>
>

[Werebat]

'Kate wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:56:58 -0500, Werebat > the
> following was posted in blue crayon:
>
>
>>
>>'Kate wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Why is it that whenever you talk to men about these emotional things,
>>>they use personal experience? It's as if the rest of the world does
>>>not exist.
>>
>><Boggle>
>>
>>I think *people* tend to go right to personal experience when discussing
>>emotional things. I mean it's not like women, by comparision, are more
>>likely to head right for the objective data when discussing emotional
>>issues. Come on.
>
>
> There is intelligent life out there! Good! Now... let's get down to
> it. :-)

I'm curious -- if you knew from the get-go that there was a flaw in your
statement about "you men", why did you make it? Just to stir things up?


>>I think almost everyone here will agree that both parents should support
>>their children financially and emotionally. The Devil is in the details.
>
>
> I agree with you.

On that point, yes. I also think almost everyone on both sides any
debate about this stuff is going to be able to agree that "the Devil is
in the details".


>>I don't beleive the OP was actually advocating that both parents should
>>be thrown in jail.
>
>
> Nor was I suggesting that women should run their husbands over, or
> that all men are cheaters, or all women are murderers.

OK


>>But you already know that, I think. The logic presented is pretty basic
>>stuff, and the only way I can see someone misreading it is if they are
>>being deliberately obfuscatory in an effort to confound other readers.
>
>
> And here I thought I was presenting a balance. I don't know the
> reason why an individual parent doesn't pay. I've seen the same stats
> as the poster who stated that the percentage of women who don't pay is
> greater than the percentage of men and we don't make a big deal about
> saying "deadbeat moms". I believe that the media has a hard time
> beating women up in the same way that they feel free to beat men up
> but I don't think that adding women on to the deadbeat parent list is
> the appropriate response. I think that the appropriate response is
> that parents should support their children and then these lists would
> be unnecessary. But.. this isn't a perfect world, is it? I also know
> that in alt.support.single-parents, the term "deadbeat dad" is
> discouraged. It is in the monthly FAQ IIRC.

Good, all of it. Although, again, "the Devil is in the details" :^)


>>>Because being male is the be all end all as far as being top of the
>>>food chain.
>>
>>That depends entirely on which "food chain" you are talking about. To
>>use a metaphor, a great white shark is not at the top of the food chain
>>in the middle of the Gobi desert. He's more of a sitting duck.
>>Environment plays a very significant factor.
>
> Only if one lives in an environment that is totally unaffected by
> every other environment... a glass fishbowl, perhaps. Otherwise, we
> see and learn that the advantage tends to go to the men.

I'm sorry, I just don't follow. How does the advantage go to men in the
family court system? Or are you just saying that "overall", men have
the advantage (as in "overall", the great white shark is at the top of
the food chain since 3/4 of the Earth is covered in water)?


>>In family court, men are most certainly not at "the top of the food
>>chain". To suggest otherwise is... well... nonsensical because it
>>flies in the face of so much data indicating the opposite.
>
>
> Men were the ones who put other men in this position (male judges). To
> blame women for taking advantage of it is like blaming men for taking
> advantage of being at the top of the food chain. It exists. There are
> reasons why it exists as it does. They are not fair reasons.. not for
> either "side."

Male judges and their misplaced chivalry have, I think, a lot to do with
the family court situation, but they are not the only factor. And I
seem to remember hearing a vocal feminist or two in college speaking out
against men abusing their power advantages.

I think I know what you are trying to say, but I have to disagree with
it inasmuch as it is an attitude that can breed a "give it up, way it
is" mentality. OTOH, I also realize that blaming women for abusing
power advantages can lead to hating women rather than correcting the
imbalance of power that resulted in their being able to abuse in the
first place (which is also undesireable).


>>>Take the women who leave their children or are not "given" custody of
>>>their children.... aren't they treated more harshly by society? They
>>>are automatically seen as bad mothers or crazy or drunks or drug
>>>abusers. We immediatly think, "What's wrong with her?" because it is
>>>not the norm.
>>
>>You're right. Non-Custodial Moms are generally assumed to have done
>>something "wrong" in order to have "lost" custody. But what does that
>>say about the reality of the family court system? Is there
>>statistically anything behind it? What kind of women lose custody
>>cases? If I were a gambling man, I'd bet that there were would be a
>>significantly higher percentage who were "bad mothers", "crazy",
>>"drunks", and "drug abusers" than the equivalent for men who lost
>>custody disputes. Of course I *could* be wrong, but I don't think so.
>
>
> If that is so, then they are more likely to not pay the child support
> ordered. Those two pieces of the puzzle fit well.

I've considered that point before, and come to the same conclusion. It
does make sense. If the majority of women who lose custody are, to use
the vernacular, "whack-jobs", then it would only follow that a greater
percentage of women who are supposed to pay CS, don't.


> That's exactly why
> women who do want to be fair and share custody are condemned as nuts,
> drunks, drug abusers, and etc.
>
> What backs up the statement that these women are *insert whatever
> issue* is that men have had to fight awfully hard to gain custody of
> their children. They have been forced to prove their ex's to be
> *insert whatever issue* or lose their children. They have had to do
> so using money to hire a private investigator or by getting medical
> records. Also, women are more likely to seek help for "emotional
> problems." Therefore, more women would be judged to be *insert
> whatever issue* in a court of law than men. Men have to prove they
> are better. Women have automatically won.

Rather like a man who loses a business promotion to a woman being
thought of as "weak" or a "loser".

You certainly sound like you think all of this is wrong.


>>>Take the men who have custody or are widowed. They are
>>>treated like idiots who don't know how to parent their own children.
>>
>>Eh? I have my son half of the time and I don't recall ever being
>>treated like an idiot who didn't know how to parent. Are you citing a
>>study here, or just going on personal experience?
>
>
> Perhaps not eloquently put but yes, I have qualitative interviews and
> can cite some examples of the difference in how widowed men are
> treated v. widowed women.

If you say. Perhaps they are scientifically valid.

What you're saying does make a sort of sense. I know people at work who
think I am a "fantastic father" and they have literally seen me with my
son only one or two times. How could they possibly know? And when I am
out alone with him (just the two of us) I seem to get a lot of admiring
looks. It could be that a father only has to be "average" to be
considered a "great parent", "for a man". Sort of like a Black person
in years gone by being thought of as a "prodigy", "for a ******", just
for being able to read. I think that's what you're talking about here.


>>>They are offered far more help than single women.
>>
>>How?

The silence.

Again, how?


>>So you are upset that just because you are a single mother, people
>>assume you are freeloading off the system and feel animosity towards you
>>because of that. I guess I can see that. I certainly wouldn't like
>>that attitude directed at me either, if it weren't true of me (and
>>probably even if it were).
>
>
> I was explaining that we all have our issues. I'm not "upset" by being
> a single mother.

I never said you were. You're upset that people assume you are
freeloading just because you're a single mother.


> I am certainly not thrilled with the situation but
> stuff happens and we're making the best of it. If I am doing anything
> at all, it is trying to explain that there are other sides to this
> very complex issue of being a single parent and the difficulties that
> single parents face - both mothers and fathers. I am seeking
> understanding. I'm willing to give what I get.

I think your case -- being a widow -- makes you something unexpected in
the alt.child.support newsgroup. No doubt there are myriad problems
associated with this, but they aren't what most of us here are going to
be thinking of when we enter a discussion. We're thinking of what we've
been burned by personally -- a tyrannical and biased system of family
courts, government agencies, and assorted "legal pickpockets" all lined
up for the next scam that will strip us of a little more money, dignity,
and time with our kids.


>>But where do you think the prejudice comes from?
>
>
> I think that it's gender bias just the same as women who have multiple
> sex partners being perceived as sluts while men are perceived as
> studs.

So you admit that the family courts are gender biased. I thought as much.

The old "slut/stud" thing, eh? That's a funny little one. My personal
theory is that at least some of it comes from women who have
normal/low/reserved sexual drives launching bad publicity at women who
are more openly sexual (for making them look bad). At least in the high
schools I have worked at, the most vocal and virulently hateful of the
"sluts" are other girls and female teachers. Of course men have their
curious reasons too (they don't want a partner who will bear children
with another man), publicly scorning the "sluts" while also wanting to
sleep with them. It's a weird thing.


>>>Ah, we all have our pet peeves don't we?
>>
>>Sure do. And to be fair, is it really reasonable to expect anyone to
>>have as much of a conniption about a societal prejudice that hasn't and
>>isn't ever going to affect *them*, personally?
>
>
> How does any of us know that for sure? Life does not come with a
> guarantee. I may never marry again but I know that there is a chance
> that my children may be effected by divorce and custody laws whether
> or not he or she initiates divorce, caused the divorce, or files first
> (to cover bases.)

Even a woman who is abusing the family court system would be interested
in reforming it if she had a son and was sufficiently far-sighted. I
don't think many people are, though.

For my part, I think it's too late for me to see any reforms that will
help me personally -- but I have one son already, and another on the
way, and this is why I have an interest in reform. Twenty years is
enough time to make a better situation for them.



>>>I agree that the immediate reaction is often revolutionary and, over
>>>time, the pendulum swings until a liveable agreement is reached.
>>
>>Well we're certainly not there at the moment.
>
>
> I know. But given a choice, I would rather work on keeping couples
> together than on the issue of how to divide assets and share custody.

That's admirable. On the other hand, "Just say no" only goes so far in
the real world.


>>>I
>>>don't agree that anyone is going to be happy about the result. If
>>>they were, we wouldn't need divorce and custody law.
>>
>>No matter the system, some people are going to be unhappy about the
>>results. But there's a difference between "unhappy" and "abused".
>>Black slaves in the deep Southern USA were undoubtedly "unhappy" about
>>their situation, and I don't think an explanation of "Well, no matter
>>how we work things out, SOMEONE will be unhappy..." could ever have
>>smoothed over their grievances. I'll tell you, as a victim of this
>>system, that kind of palliative talk only infuriates me.
>
>
> I may have written that wrong. What I meant to say was that in a good
> agreement *both* sides will not be happy. It's pretty standard that if
> one side does all the giving, then the other will be happy but if both
> sides give enough, then no one will be happy. That's a difficult
> concept for me to convey so if I still haven't... oh well. I did try.

I see what you are saying. To be honest, my own situation with my ex is
one where neither one of us is totally happy, and I think it is pretty
"fair" overall (or it will be once I finish paying off this student loan
debt of hers). However, what bothers me is that the whole deal was set
up contingent on HER approval, and we all know that if she decides to go
crazy-go-nuts at any point in the future and demand full custody (or, if
she is smart, just 90% of the standard CS award while I have our son 50%
of the time), she'll win. That I don't like. It's a "push comes to
shove" thing, where we both know what would happen if we decided to get
nasty, and that strongly affects both our social bargaining and my own
feeling of security and mental health. The nasty things she could do to
me are almost all legal, while the only ones left to me are purely
illegal. Not that either of us wants to go there, but hopefully you can
see my point.

- Ron ^*^

[Werebat]

Kent wrote:

> Why the FK is this crossposted to alt.support.childfree? We don't have a dog
> in this fight, and never will.

Perhaps because someone is trolling. Enjoy! :^)

Seriously -- who ever said you needed to actually father a child in
order to be forced to pay child support?

- Ron ^*^

[V]

"'Kate" > wrote in message
...

> All this because I agreed that being called a deadbeat dad was a
> problem and that the media created the problem by perpetuating the
> stereotype. Evidently, he feels that I'm responsible for the term.
> That wasn't rational. If I had received a rational argument in
> response (more than the one time), it might have been an interesting
> thread. Unfortunately, that didn't happen. It degenerated at a rapid
> pace.
>
> 'Kate
>

He is just looking for a reason to **** and moan.
Bleh.
Fooey on him.
Let's get back to better things ......
V

[YooperBoyka]

"'Kate" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:48:22 GMT, "V" > the
> following was posted in blue crayon:
>
>
>>I have a new name..."V the feminist lawyer want to be"
>>BAH.
>>I can not wait to tell my wittle fwends at the prescwool....I met a meanie
>>on usenet who dislike feminists lawyer wanna bes......
>>lol
>>V
>
> Be careful or he'll taunt you. Whoooo.


Your mother was a hamster,...and your father smelled
of elderberries!

(sigh,...yeah, I know,...stolen)
(sorry)

[YooperBoyka]

"'Kate" > wrote in message
...
>
> .... For some reason, seeing a man father his
> children is.... well, hot. <g>
>



THUD!

BTW,...thanks for an interesting sub-thread.

[rj]

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 23:12:52 GMT, 'Kate > wrote:

>On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:42:41 GMT, "V" > the
>following was posted in blue crayon:
>
>>
>>"Rambler" > wrote in message
...
>>snip
>>>
>>> It's because I'm a man, isn't it, one of those horrible wretches who put
>>> you in your current positon. I can take it .., I'm used to getting picked
>>> on.
>>>
>>> Rambler
>>snip
>>
>>Kate lost her husband to death.
>>We do not think men are bad people. Actually we love men who have
>>accountability.
>>Your childhood and being picked on has nothing to do with this group. Why
>>are you used to being picked on? You should seek therapy for being so darn
>>angry!
>>V
>
>All this because I agreed that being called a deadbeat dad was a
>problem and that the media created the problem by perpetuating the
>stereotype. Evidently, he feels that I'm responsible for the term.
>That wasn't rational. If I had received a rational argument in
>response (more than the one time), it might have been an interesting
>thread. Unfortunately, that didn't happen. It degenerated at a rapid
>pace.
>
>'Kate

LOL...

You and Rambler both share at least one little character flaw...
You've *both* gotta have the last word... even if it's elsewhere.

rj

[[email protected]]

In
. com>
posted on 30 Mar 2005 23:02:07 -0800, "rj"
>, wrote:

>
>'Kate wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:18:34 +0800, Rambler
>> > the following was posted in blue
>> crayon:
>>
>> >Go ahead, you can have the last word. I know that is important to
>you.
>>
>> What an angry man.
>>
>> 'Kate
>
>
>sigh...
>
>And what an angry woman.
>
>I was finding this exchange to be both intelligent (a rarity on usenet)
>and stimulating. Then somewhere along the way it degenerated into
>finger-pointing and name-calling. A pity...

Follow alt.support.childfree for a few months, and you will
see lots of this.

Regards,
"Nilkids"
[American in Australia posting from alt.support.childfree,
contactable on said group.]


>
>rj

[xkatx]

"'Kate" > wrote in message ...
> On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 07:37:07 +0530, rj > the
> following was posted in blue crayon:
>
>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 23:12:52 GMT, 'Kate > wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:42:41 GMT, "V" > the
>>>following was posted in blue crayon:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Rambler" > wrote in message
...
>>>>snip
>>>>>
>>>>> It's because I'm a man, isn't it, one of those horrible wretches who put
>>>>> you in your current positon. I can take it .., I'm used to getting picked
>>>>> on.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rambler
>>>>snip
>>>>
>>>>Kate lost her husband to death.
>>>>We do not think men are bad people. Actually we love men who have
>>>>accountability.
>>>>Your childhood and being picked on has nothing to do with this group. Why
>>>>are you used to being picked on? You should seek therapy for being so darn
>>>>angry!
>>>>V
>>>
>>>All this because I agreed that being called a deadbeat dad was a
>>>problem and that the media created the problem by perpetuating the
>>>stereotype. Evidently, he feels that I'm responsible for the term.
>>>That wasn't rational. If I had received a rational argument in
>>>response (more than the one time), it might have been an interesting
>>>thread. Unfortunately, that didn't happen. It degenerated at a rapid
>>>pace.
>>>
>>>'Kate
>>
>>LOL...
>>
>>You and Rambler both share at least one little character flaw...
>>You've *both* gotta have the last word... even if it's elsewhere.
>>
>>rj
>
> LOL.. only 'cause gestures don't come across on usenet.
>


That's alright...

Kate, you have, officially...

_____________________________..########___________ _##________##_________
____________________________###########__________. .##_______##________##
___________________________####_____####__________ _#______.#_______####_
________________________.########_____##########__ ___#___.#____####______
________________________.########______..######### _____#_.#__####_________
____________________..###############_________#### #####____#_____________
________________########################______#### ###__#_____####..______
______________############################________ ___#___#_______####..__
___________##################################_____ ___.#____#________.##__
_________######66##########66##########66######___ ___#______#___________
________######66##########66##########66########__ ___.#_______##.________
_______######66##########66##########66##########_ ___##_______.##._______
______######66##########66##########66############ ___.#._________________
_____.######66##########66##########66############ #._____________________
_____######66666666####66666666####66666666####### ####____________________
_____######666666666###666666666###666666666####|# #####____________________
_____####|##66666666####66666666####66666666###### #####____________________
_____########66666#######66666#######66666######## ###____________________
_____.############################################ #.____________________
_____..########################################### #_____________________
______.,########################################## ______________________
_______..########################################_ ______________________
________..######################################.. _______________________
___________.##################################.___ ______________________
_____________.##############################._____ ______________________
________________#########################.._______ ______________________


DROPPED DA BOMB!!


--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?

[Phil #3]

"Cloaked" > wrote in message
...
>I am not convinced that the admission eliminates credibility; however,
> it does imply a defininte bias - and that comments and actions must be
> closely examined for hidden agendas.
>
> Just from casual observation, there was a time when femminism stood
> for equality. Now, it appears that femminists want superiority. How
> ironic that they would subscribe to a behaviour in themselves that
> they profess to detest in men!
>
> Hmmm.... perhaps they are closer to equality that they thought!
>
> Too bad they could not have used this opporetunity to raise us all up
> a notch!
>
> But alas, they are achieving equality by reverting to the lowest
> common denominator.
>
> <sigh>
>

Your last sentence sounds a bit sexist to me but perhaps I am being overly
sensitive.
Modern feminism is only interested in special rights for women without
responsibility while claiming these special rights are somehow equitable.
For instance, they demanded the right to vote but strenuously avoid the
responsibility to defend it with liability for selective service or when a
pregnancy occurs, by law the father has no choices while the mother has at
least four, which to feminists represents equality.
Personally, I do not choose to believe one who supports a system of belief
that has been proven to be less than honest about their goals.
Phil #3

>
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:19:57 GMT, "Phil #3" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"V" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>> "Cloaked" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> <SNIP>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So you are accusing him of being a cheater? Rather presumptuous,
>>>> wouldn't you say? Sounds like something a femminist lawyer would come
>>>> out with.
>>>>
>>>> snip
>>>
>>> Hey, hey.....watch it....everyone move out of here.......there is
>>> nothing
>>> to see here....psst....hey you...yeah..you mister...with the loin cloth
>>> and knuckles dragging as you gait slowly....yeah...you...
>>> Ahem...you gotta problem with feminist lawyers?
>>> V, who is a feminist and working on being a lawyer
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Speaking only for myself, admission of feminism completely eliminates
>>credibility.
>>Phil #3
>>
>>
>

[[email protected]]

In Message-ID:<GY43e.866196$8l.217578@pd7tw1no> posted on
Fri, 01 Apr 2005 05:27:02 GMT, "xkatx"
>, wrote:

....a 304 line post where could have only written 7 lines of
text using ASCII or ANSI text!

And on alt.support.childfree I get accused of "wasting
bandwidth" :-)

[Rest snipped, see original]
Regards,
"Nilkids"

[T]

"'Kate" > wrote in

> Actually, I was too. Too bad Rambler couldn't keep up.

Actually Kate, Rambler blew you away about 14 posts ago, you fizzled so
quicky!

Quite frankly, your posts are boring and non conducive to the group.

[T]

"V" > wrote in

> Let's get back to better things ......
> V

Do you really think people are involved in this group because they enjoy
child support issues?
Get a clue, we're all here looking for solutions to a very large problem.

We don't have the time for your personal petty issues with men!

[xkatx]

"T" > wrote in message
.net...
>
> "'Kate" > wrote in
>
>> Actually, I was too. Too bad Rambler couldn't keep up.
>
> Actually Kate, Rambler blew you away about 14 posts ago, you fizzled so
> quicky!
>
> Quite frankly, your posts are boring and non conducive to the group.

Ahh... Funny. I could say the same thing about you!
Ever notice how this is cross-posted to 4 different groups? I'm not sure if
anyone really cares much about the other groups they aren't part of, but
isn't this one of the many joys of trolls, cross posting and things you just
don't give a damn about?

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?

[xkatx]

"'Kate" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 03:12:50 GMT, "xkatx" >
> the following was posted in blue crayon:
>
>>
>>"T" > wrote in message
.net...
>>>
>>> "'Kate" > wrote in
>>>
>>>> Actually, I was too. Too bad Rambler couldn't keep up.
>>>
>>> Actually Kate, Rambler blew you away about 14 posts ago, you fizzled so
>>> quicky!
>>>
>>> Quite frankly, your posts are boring and non conducive to the group.
>>
>>Ahh... Funny. I could say the same thing about you!
>>Ever notice how this is cross-posted to 4 different groups? I'm not sure
>>if
>>anyone really cares much about the other groups they aren't part of, but
>>isn't this one of the many joys of trolls, cross posting and things you
>>just
>>don't give a damn about?
>
> Oh.. goodness. Do you think that post was serious? I thought he had
> to be kidding.
>
> 'Kate

Will anyone ever know? Does anyone really care? Either way, there's always
good reading here, especially at 330am!

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?

[G]

"xkatx" > wrote in
>
> Ahh... Funny. I could say the same thing about you!

Ah, lets not get into the petty Usenet habit of developing ****ing matches
and flame wars between the regulars.

If anyone hasn't got anything useful to say about the topic at hand, don't
waste bandwidth!!!!!

[V]

"T" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "V" > wrote in
>
>> Let's get back to better things ......
>> V
>
> Do you really think people are involved in this group because they enjoy
> child support issues?
> Get a clue, we're all here looking for solutions to a very large problem.
>
> We don't have the time for your personal petty issues with men!
>

I have no petty issues with men. What solutions are you looking for and what
is your large problem?
V

[Kent]

"G" > wrote

> Ah, lets not get into the petty Usenet habit of developing ****ing matches
> and flame wars between the regulars.

I believe we are about 9 years too late for that...



Kent

[[email protected]]

In > posted on
Fri, 01 Apr 2005 17:48:15 +0800, Rambler
>, wrote:

>rj wrote:
>
>> And Rambler...
>>
>> <grin>
>>
>> You're just as much to blame. Both of you... Cut out the condescension
>> and the cleverly-worded name-calling and go to your corners.
>
>But bossman ... I was just having a conversation until I got the 'angry
>man' and whatnot comments.
>
>Actually, rj, I disagree with you. The line that I draw is that once
>the line has been crossed, then the rules go out. What did Leonard
>McCoy say to John Wayne? "Rules? Who ever heard of rules in a knife fight."
>
>Rambler

Offhand, I don't remember who said it, but from memory
someone talking about such potentially deadly conflicts said
something along the lines of

"The first rule is that there are no rules."

However, I can't be bothered to look it up at present.
Perhaps someone else knows the source.

Regards,
"Nilkids"

An ancient American, in Australia, who is reachable on
"alt.support.childfree", the only group of the above that he
follows. Perhaps I should change my nickname to "Old Yank
Geezer Nilkids" ?

Of course, this would result in a chorus of complaints of
the people on this "alt.support.childfree" who have me
killfiled.

It might take a few seconds of their precious and valuable
time, you know!

I have been sorely tempted to ask the people on
"alt.support.childfree" to give the world an estimate of
what they consider their "time" worth per minute, but so far
I have resisted the temptation. :-)

Incidentally, I have not killfiled anyone on
"alt.support.childfree", I read all posts on the group and
often comment on them.

If any psychologist on any of the above crossposted groups
wants to see some examples of "denial", or "delusions of
reference" or outright "paranoid" and/or "psychopathic"
behaviour symptoms or syndromes they should really make an
effort to follow the group.

However, I wouldn't advise that anyone use a genuine name or
email address when doing so, as some on this supposedly
"support" group have openly admitted that it is a "shark
tank" and those of us who know what sharks can be like
should take this as a warning.

At the moment, am not willing to give an e-mail address to
everyone, and it is only a mail address anyway, which I will
cheerfully abandon if I start getting spam on it.

If people who want to contact me by email wish to post on
alt.support.childfree with a contactable address, I will
consider contacting them via email.

However, I won't promise to do so. Depends on my evaluation
of them. :-)

Regards,
"Nilkids"

[[email protected]]

In > posted on
Sat, 02 Apr 2005 00:39:07 +0800, Rambler
>, wrote:

>V wrote:
>> "'Kate" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>
>>>All this because I agreed that being called a deadbeat dad was a
>>>problem and that the media created the problem by perpetuating the
>>>stereotype. Evidently, he feels that I'm responsible for the term.
>>>That wasn't rational. If I had received a rational argument in
>>>response (more than the one time), it might have been an interesting
>>>thread. Unfortunately, that didn't happen. It degenerated at a rapid
>>>pace.
>>>
>>>'Kate
>>>
>>
>>
>> He is just looking for a reason to **** and moan.
>> Bleh.
>> Fooey on him.
>> Let's get back to better things ......
>
>Lol ... and it seems that you are just looking for an excuse to continue
>to trip the night fantastic. Reality must suck for you ... clashing as
>it does with anything that you think, see, say or do. Must be really
>convenient to be able to dismiss anything that contradicts you as
>'****ing and moaning.' A simple explanation for a simple mind.

Gee, I see a lot of people on usenet using that excuse,
especially on a group such as alt.support.childfree which is
the only one of the above groups that I follow.
>
>Amusing. Now I can see why people come out against women. Were the two
>of you my experience with women, I would certainly understand how men
>would want nothing to do with them. Thank goodness my experience has
>been with the intelligent variety.

Um, well, actually, there are quite a few intelligent women,
even in the US population. For intelligent men, the main
problem, IMHO, is to find and marry an equally intelligent
woman.

From my point of view, why should _any_ intelligent man seek
a less intelligent partner unless he is insecure in some
way.

Of course, until comparatively recently, women in the USA
were not encouraged to be "intelligent".

They were encouraged to concentrate on physical attributes,
such as "beauty", or "fashion"... or even the willingness to
bear children.

Intelligence was supposed to be carefully concealed! If any
literate people want an earlier example of this, consider
the character of "Scarlett O'Hara" in the classic book "Gone
With the Wind".

How many of the readers of this post have actually read the
book, not just seen the movie?

Note: Such a discussion should be completely "on topic" for
"alt.support.childfree" but if any of the members of other
groups are tempted to discuss the issue, it might be better
to mark the post "OT" for "off topic" as some of the people
on this group have elaborate and childish "delurking
rituals" which new posters are supposed to follow for some
arcane reason!

One wonders why they try to post on an international
newsgroup where opinions differ.

Personally, I have suggested many times that if they are so
extremely intolerant of the opinions of others that they
either form a moderated newsgroup or even get the hell off
international usenet altogether and form a closed email
group!

Would you agree, Geoff?

I am an American, in Australia, posting from and reading on
only one of the above groups: "alt.support.childfree"
which, in my estimation so far is much more of a "shark
group" or even a "hate group" than a "support group"!

However, people from other groups are invited [possibly
only by me] to follow it and form their own opinions.


>Continue ****ing and moaning. You cheapen all women in that way.

I don't. I quite value women. Which is why have been
married to one for decades now.

As someone once said, "Women may not be much, but they are
the best other human sex we have"...or something like that
anyway!

Does anyone else in the world find it amazing that there is
still so much apparent disagreement and outright hatred
between male and female humans, even though they may be of
the same race and nationality?

However, as the TV ads sometimes state, "Wait! There is
more!"

On "alt.support.childfree" if you are male in both sex and
gender you will be accused of being otherwise!

Amazing, isn't it? But you don't even have to be American
or even live in the USA to play!

No matter who you are, there are really some people on this
group who will refuse to accept your stated sex and gender!

As amazing as it seems, they will call you a liar!

Try it and see! Invite your friends to try this extremely
unusual group.

From what I have seen so far, pretty close to a "flat earth
group"

My wife and I are "child free" by mutual agreement, but if
any reader of this message wishes to be accused of being
somehow aberrant in sex or gender, they only need to post a
few messages here to see for themselves!

An American in Australia, male in both sex and gender, and
obviously refuse to lie about either.

Unlike some others on the group who apparently wish to play
childish games and wish to tell lies.

However, of the of the above groups am only reading
"alt.support.childfree",

Anyone interested in my posts can follow the group and post
on it.

I will try to answer any crossposts that I consider worth
answering.

Am a bit sorry for those on alt.support.childfree who don't
seem to be able to make their choice on such issues as sex,
gender, religion, and so on.

However, IMHO, all these are a matter of "free choice"!

Regards,
"Nilkids"

[snip, see original]

[Cloaked]

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 00:39:07 +0800, Rambler
> wrote:

>V wrote:
>> "'Kate" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>
>>>All this because I agreed that being called a deadbeat dad was a
>>>problem and that the media created the problem by perpetuating the
>>>stereotype. Evidently, he feels that I'm responsible for the term.
>>>That wasn't rational. If I had received a rational argument in
>>>response (more than the one time), it might have been an interesting
>>>thread. Unfortunately, that didn't happen. It degenerated at a rapid
>>>pace.
>>>
>>>'Kate
>>>
>>
>>
>> He is just looking for a reason to **** and moan.
>> Bleh.
>> Fooey on him.
>> Let's get back to better things ......
>
>Lol ... and it seems that you are just looking for an excuse to continue
>to trip the night fantastic. Reality must suck for you ... clashing as
>it does with anything that you think, see, say or do. Must be really
>convenient to be able to dismiss anything that contradicts you as
>'****ing and moaning.' A simple explanation for a simple mind.
>

But Rambler, this is a characteristic of todays femminists! If you
disagree with them, you are dismissed as either insignificant or
irrelevant.

If you do not "go away", then you are labeled a misogynist.

Definition of misogynist: Any man who is winning an arguement with a
woman.

Warren Farrell makes a distinction in Femminists. There is the
"Mature" feminist that seeks true equality and balance between men and
women (very uncomon), and the "Immature" femminist - generally wanting
superiority for women, and who are quite happy to man-bash (all too
common).

What I have seen in this thread was no surprize. That is why I simply
"refused to play". You cannot "win" an arguement with such people.
When other parties to a conversation are not willing to consider other
points of view, and simply shut out other possibilities, then you
can't even approach concensus, or anything meaningful. So the
discussion reverts into a childlike state where nothing is
accomplished.

I have met a number of "femminists", and I must say that most fo them
have a very deep hatered in them. The hate is commonly directed at
men. I have NOT been able to determine why this hatered exists, but it
seems to me that men are being used as scape goats for the hate. I
think most of them foolish because if men disappeared tomorrow, their
hate would still be there! By bashing men, they damage much and solve
nothing. The actions of subverting and oppressing men are simply used
as a quick fix. It feels good at the time, but it does not last long,
and it solves nothing.

Don't sweat it bro! Let'em have their "fun". They don't have a clue,
and we are not going to change that - at least not today. They make
their own beds, and will have to lay in them - more than likely ALONE.
The sad thing is that this just fuels the anger that they feel towards
men! which just makes the situation worse.

>Amusing. Now I can see why people come out against women. Were the two
>of you my experience with women, I would certainly understand how men
>would want nothing to do with them. Thank goodness my experience has
>been with the intelligent variety.
>
>Continue ****ing and moaning. You cheapen all women in that way.
>
>Rambler
>
>> V
>
>Interesting ... the very first girl I had a crush on was a V ... Verity
>in fact. Shudder to think that you all are one and the same.
>>
>>

[Father of the Year]

Very nice information to have. Do you have a link to these stats?

Thanks
"Rambler" > wrote in message
...
> xkatx wrote:
> > "Rambler" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>Father of the Year wrote:
> >>
> >>>new to group. What is a deadbeat dad?
> >>
> >>it is usually somebody who has been flailed to a ninch of their life by
> >>being accused of being insensitive to their child's needs while in fact
> >>they are struggling to put food on the table for themselves whilest
being
> >>commanded to make good sized (for their incomes) support payments.
> >
> >
> > No, not always. That sure might be the case sometimes, but other times
a
> > deadbeat parent could be just that. Sometimes a deadbeat parent just
> > doesn't feel they need to live up to their parenting responsibilities.
> > That's not always meaning money wise. I would consider a deadbeat
parent as
> > someone who just does nothing. I'm sorry, it doesn't take much money to
> > spend some time with your own child and show them love and that they
are, in
> > fact, a human being. There's a lot of 'parents' - both mothers AND
> > fathers - who just don't give a damn. It goes both ways, but it seems
that
> > you just hear about the dads more than the moms. There's selfish
parents
> > both ways, and it's not fair to say that every parent who cannot afford
to
> > support their children is a deadbeat. It does go so much further than
that,
> > because there's also lots of parents who choose not to help with their
> > children and have more than enough means to survive well, while helping
out
> > financially with their children.
> > Support payments are only a part of a child's needs.
> >
> >
> >>I typically refer to it as "Beat Dad Dead" in my affidavits, and yes,
the
> >>ex has thrown that term around to everybody, kids included.
> >
> >
> > I don't agree with that. I, personally, believe whatever I think and
feel
> > negatively about my ex stays to myself, or to the ears of MY
friends/family
> > without the ears of my children around. I have never once said a single
> > negative word about my sons' father for them to hear, nor have I ever
said
> > anything negative to someone who would pass my words on to them. There
are
> > a lot of parents, as well, who do the same, and then on the other hand,
> > there are some who have no problem insulting their child's other parent
and
> > vocalize whatever anger they may have. I do believe, in every way
possible,
> > that this is so wrong and unfair to the child, even more to the other
half
> > of that child.
>
> Always two sides to a coin. My ex would evidently be the opposite side
> of the coin to you.
>
> but leaving you and me out of it, the studies that I have heard of and
> read indicate that a very small minority of fathers don't pay the child
> support ordered when they fully have the means to. The vast majority of
> no-payors are those that cannot afford it due to either unemployment,
> health or an order being set outside of their earning potential. Those
> that pay what they can *are still* labeled deadbeat dads.
>
> Flip that around a second, not according to you and me, but according
> again to the studies I have read and heard of. The vast majority (89%?)
> of custody decisions go to mothers, which means the vast majority (89%)
> of child maintenance payors are fathers. Out of the 11% of mothers who
> are supposed to be paying child support, a much greater number (over 30%
> comes to mind) are "dead beat Mom's" than are the fathers (1 to 2%) who
> are "dead beat Dads," yet you don't hear the phrase "Dead Beat Mom" do
you?
>
> But those are just the studies.
>
> Rambler

[Father of the Year]

"Oh, and if I recall correctly, aren't the majority of voters women?"

True or not, these oppressed fathers have mothers,sisters, girlfriends, and
grandmothers and friends witnessing these attrocities and VOTING. Remind
your politicians that pander to the fems of this little fact.


"Rambler" > wrote in message
...
> 'Kate wrote:
>
> > Given that the greatest number of non-payers (by a wide margin) are
> > fathers, why go after the mother?
>
> This is a serious comment, yes? The reason why the greatest numbers of
> non-payers, on a strictly numerical basis, are fathers *is because* the
> greatest number of *all* payers, by a whopping margin are men. Take one
> percent of a billion and you are going to come up with a larger number
> than 50% of a thousand.
>
> Now, switch those figures around, and all of a sudden, where custody
> situations and child maintenance equal, you'd have, statistically
> speaking, a population of 500 million non-payers as opposed to the
> 100,000 that you have now. The *reason* for this is that it has been my
> personal experience that women are treated far more gently then men are
> in this process.
>
> Take a look at child access interference. Were that prosecuted to the
> same extent that child maintenance is prosecuted, heck we'd have kids
> growing up without parents, because both Mom and Dad would be in jail.
>
> > But aside from that, mothers are
> > listed in the non-payers listings when they are on websites and in the
> > papers in many areas. If I were a NCF, I would be fighting the media
> > to get rid of the term. Most of the people working in media who are
> > in positions of power are men. Start writing them and telling them
> > that you will refuse to buy their sponsor's products if they continue
> > to malign NCF's.
>
> Been there, doing that. The term is perhaps widespread by the media,
> but it is consistently placed forward by advocate groups to keep the
> terms in front of people. Take the term 'lesbianism.' Absolutely great
> pr work on the group that advocated that. On the one hand, you've got
> 'gays' which are maligned because they are male homosexuals. On the
> other you've got 'lesbians,' who in reality are merely female gays, but
> the perception is much different, because their pr machine was better.
>
> Take the Dead Beat Dad 'concept.' Again, a better pr machine. And it's
> not the media. The system is continually reinforced through domestic
> violence issues, child support issues. Oh, and if I recall correctly,
> aren't the majority of voters women?
>
> it is a gender thing only because a small part of one gender has made it
> a gender thing. One can either evolve back to the centre which takes
> time and pain, or revolt back to the centre. That's why you get people
> making it into a *huge* gender thing, to push it back to the centre.
> The problem with that is that a 'revolution' has an amazing tendancy of
> pushing too far in the opposite direction.
>
> Just my two kopeks worth.
>
> Rambler
>