The Liberator receives many advertising promotions for attorney books. A recent one was entitled "Splitting Retirement Benefits in a Divorce: Cut a bigger piece of the pie for your clients" (read "female clients").
This commonly accepted practice of strip-mining the institution of the family to line lawyers' pockets makes me sick. Social "workers" building their empire by "serving" single mothers are no better. Few of these people are even considerate enough to leave some hay for the donkeys.
Here's a tip for you divorced donkeys without enough hay. You can stretch what little money you have by shopping for clothes, furniture, and other items at facilities like the Goodwill. Some items are like new. My wife buys many things, most of our and our families clothes, at the local Helping Hand. Swallow false pride, and check out what similar facilities are available in your community.
One has to be in this movement a long time before one quits blaming divorce prejudice exclusively on lawyers and judges, and begins to realize that most of the fault lies in the misandric milieu in which these sharks swim -- and feed. Incredibly enough, modern society seems to consider it acceptable to kick husbands out of their own homes, separate them from their children, and expect them to finance this operation.
I say "No, Nay, Never." Every man who cooperates with this evil system is contributing to the downfall of society, as well as of his family. In the past, the MDA has called for several "Atlas Shrugged operations" (alimony/support strikes). The rest of the movement ignored the calls, causing the situation to deteriorate even further. Now, with automatic withholding and computer tracking, that tactic may be obsolete. We now recommend a boycott of marriage itself. Unfortunately, the movement is not organized enough to take a unified position on this tactic either (nor with many good ideas of others). So that will probably also come to naught.
The Liberator has long argued against strictly "no-fault" divorce laws; they add a certain absolution to the process.
I think reformers should confront politicians on all these issues. If some government major-domo pats me on the head, and tells me what a good boy I am, I begin to wonder what I am doing wrong.
Some activists disagree with this approach, suggesting we "work to change the system." In my humble opinion, they are naive. Long experience shows that appeals to reason have never worked, and never will.
Every revolution requires its polemics since oppressors are usually deaf to reasoned whispers. -- Sylvia Ann Hewlett, A Lesser Life: The Myth of Women's LiberationThese differences of opinion are merely tactical, however. Reformers with common ends must not let different approaches come between them.
The Liberator has been criticized for taking conservative stands. On many issues we do, but with reservations. For example, the December 25-31, 1995, Washington Times weekly edition carried an excellent, father-friendly article by fellow activists Stu Miller and Rich Zubaty. It is highly unlikely any liberal publication would so offend its favorite feminist constituency. Indeed this very point was made in the January 8, 1996, US News & World Report (page 21) by editorialist -- and Liberator subscriber -- John Leo, criticizing liberal writer and commentator Michael Kinsley for his misandric attitude. Paul Craig Roberts, our page one writer this issue, is also conservative.
California Republican Governor Pete Wilson is another rightist (if only moderately so) hero in trying to dump that state's affirmative action preferences.
This is not to say all conservative philosophy is intelligent, or all liberals have arrested psychological development. The former just have blind spots. Among those relevant to us, the conservative attitude toward criminals is "lock 'em up." Liberals want to let them out. The men's movement advocates a better way than either: Quit creating them. Divorce courts awarding near automatic maternal custody are just about the greatest spawners of crime there is.
It's not the economy, it's the values stupid (pardon the pun). There is a subversive cabal operating in Western society with a hidden agenda of eliminating the influence of traditional families, religion, and morality.
Lenin said that to lie convincingly is a sign of intelligence. Well, feminists, liberals, and the media -- all close enough to urge the use of condoms -- must be brilliant. They have convinced society there is truth in the myth about the plight of single/welfare mothers. Welfare mothers now on average receive benefits that yield them the equivalent of an $8.50-an-hour 40-hour-a-week job. A Cato Institute study by Michael Tanner finds that in 29 states welfare pays even better than working for Americorps. The government shutdown has ended, darnit! Now the alimony collectors are back in business.
The national budget is $25 trillion a year, demonstrating the brilliance of Will
Rogers, who said, "Thank God,. we don't get all the government we pay for."
Still, both political parties argue, not over decreasing social spending, but how
much to
I would, though, like to see another agency -- the Elimination of Nonsense Bureau.
It would seek out and recommend for elimination all senseless reports,
requirements, etc., mostly having to do with affirmative action, harassment taboos,
father-tracking, and environmental excesses. Nah. Wouldn't work. It would just
be staffed with make-work bureaucrats, adding yet another layer of nonsense. If
Congress were sensible enough to enact this, we would not need it.
The media pontificates about sexual crime, but spawns plenty themselves.
Common sense dictates that ubiquitous pornography and the social mandate for
women to be "sexy" stimulates the natural male sex instinct. Many sex predators
would be otherwise engaged, if it were not for the pervasive media fixation on, and
hype about, sex.
We can blame media hype for many of the false sex accusations which have
imprisoned so many innocent men (and some women). Whoever wrote the movie
script "One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest" ought to do another about these guys.
The male population of the US is over 121 million, with
around 40 percent at the age where they may confront divorce or some other form
of anti-male discrimination. If only half of them do, that means over 24 million
males experience at least one form (editor: consisting of from one to many acts) of
sex discrimination -- just in the U.S.. Think about that.
This column has often deplored the inability of the men/fathers' movement to
effectively counter discrimination. No need to rehash the personal problems
preventing it; but we must try working around them. Independent actions are
futile. Only in Frank Sinatra songs can one ram butt down a million kilowatt dam.
Those rams need to coordinate their charges. The Liberator has tried to
convince this movement of that since 1968.
Still trying, we have initiated a "Leadership Forum" on our Internet Home page .
Our postage and paper costs have skyrocketed. We must
either cut the size of The Liberator, or greatly increase circulation. If we
do not grow, the financial and time sacrifices involved in publishing make its
continuation unlikely when we are gone.
We have an agreement with one large state organization to become their official
publication. In return, they will get substantial space in the Organization section.
But that is only a start in the right direction.
Readers can help us spread the word in two ways: 1st, ask local organization
leaders to consider using The Liberator as its official publication; 2nd,
write to national syndicated columnists and national politicians offering them a free
Liberator subscription. Send us their acceptance written on their stationery,
and it will be done. We will give your local media, judges, and politicians
half price subscriptions, with the above requirement.
Reprinted with permission from -- The
Liberator .
[ HOME ]
[ BACK ]
The Backlash! is a feature of Shameless Men Press