I need help tracking down a this deadbeat asshole !

"'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.

"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!

"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" 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!!!!!

"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

"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

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"

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]

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.

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