In article ,
 knoxy  wrote:

> In article  {at}news.central.cox.net>, mark_sobolewski{at}yahoo.com 
> says...
> > In article ,
> >  knoxy  wrote:
> > 
> > > In article  > > {at}news.central.cox.net>, mark_sobolewski{at}yahoo.com 
> > > says...
> > > > In article
,
> > > >  knoxy  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > > The situations are treated differently
because usually they are 
> > > > > > different.
> > > > > > Most often when a man is raising children
alone it is because the 
> > > > > > woman 
> > > > > > has
> > > > > > abondonned both man and children.  If she
wanted the children most 
> > > > > > likely
> > > > > > she would get them.
> > > > > >
> > > > > So, if the roles are reversed and the man abandoned his 
> > > > > wife and children, that single mother should be treated 
> > > > > like a hero too by your reasoning. Oh, I forgot, no man 
> > > > > have ever abandoned his wife and children, right?
> > > > 
> > > > It has happened.  But as of late, most of the single mums in 
> > > > our female empowered society are that way due to their own
> > > > personal choices.
> > > > 
> > > Do you know the reasons behind those choices?
> > > If not, you don't know what you're talking about.
> > 
> > Since we're not longer talking about the big, bad 1950's when
> > men could beat their wives with a stick no thicker than his thumb,
> > it's quite unlikely that it's due to serious physical
> > or emotional abuse.  
> > 
> Oh I see, so just because we no longer live in the 50's, 
> men has stop beating their wives... yeah, right.

What a nice generalization.  Are you saying ALL men
beat their wives? :-)  

> > Quite simply: American women are empowered more than any
> > other group in human history and they STILL can't tie their
> > own shoelaces without some kind of sugar daddy
> > looking after them most of the time.
> >
> If they can't tie their own shoelaces without a mans 
> help, why all the divorces? 

Alimony and mommy-support.  Like the American Express
card, few "liberated" women leave home without it. :-)

Yes, I know you don't collect CS and Sweden doesn't
have alimony.  Or wait, do Swedish women really need it?

http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/g/gay/03/gay051103.htm
"1996, Sweden's child support formula was adjusted 
so that low-income parents (usually fathers) would 
be required to repay more of the state's basic support 
entitlement. The change was projected to create 
savings in the welfare system. Within two years, 
it was widely recognized that the reforms had 
created serious problems and the government 
promised an investigation. Low income parents 
really had low income. Instead of paying more, 
they were forced into debt in large numbers 
and could not get out. The traditional distinction 
between fathers and mothers was apparent. 
Entitlements were providing a secure economic 
situation for mothers and children, and the 
entitlement system was forcing fathers out of 
mainstream economic activity and into long-term poverty."

From each according to his ability, to each according
to her needs...

> It looks to me that they can 
> do almost anything without a mans help, and that's the 
> problem, for men like you.

The market for family-oriented men in their mid-30's with
aging career women was pretty good before I went off of it.
The problem was that I didn't trust these women more
than I could throw them (and at my age, that's rather
difficult! :-)

Speaking of availability: Wouldn't single mommy-dearest
be better off finding men willing to financially
support her single motherhood than so-called deadbeats?
Oh, wait, the number of volunteers isn't too hot, is it?

> > > > What did you say about soc.men blaming the nearest woman
> > > > for his predicament?  Now you're whitewashing the actions
> > > > of these women.
> > > >
> > > Nope, I just say that there's a double standard in the 
> > > way we treat single mothers and single fathers. 
> > 
> > HAHAHAHAAH!
> > 
> > No F'ing kidding!
> > 
> > Lessee: Poor single mothers, often by choice, are given
> > all kinds of special handouts from the state often
> > with no questions asked while single fathers must
> > struggle to deal with the family courts to get custody
> > (even if the mother is abusive to the children) and
> > is referred to as a deadbeat.
> > 
> Single fathers who raise their children don't get 
> referred to as deadbeats.It's fathers who want to 
> pretend that they don't have any financial 
> responsibility for their kids that are deadbeats.

A lot of this may have to do with the fact that they
never wanted these little bundles of joy to begin with.

And no, they aren't referred to as deadbeats because they
don't raise their children.  They're referred to as such
because they don't provide MONEY.  Give the men
checks and children they chose to have and I'm sure
they wouldn't have too many problems "parenting" either.  

> > If some people are recognizing that single fathers have to bust
> > their ass in comparison to single mothers, that's just
> > the beginning.  Be prepared for this "double standard" to
> > become even more extreme.
> >
> Single fathers AND mothers have to bust their arses to 
> raise their children alone.
> The double standard is that we still believe that 
> fathers are less competent to raise their children, the 
> same reason mothers get awarded custody more often than 
> men.

I disagree.

A former girlfriend (not partner :-) of mine is a family
law attorney and told me about her first case of a woman
who was collecting $800 per child per month in child-support
for 3 children.  One of the children was turning 18 so the
mother went to the judge to ask that the "child" support
be adjusted to $1200 per month so the total would remain
consistent with the mother's needs.

She got it.

I love children.  Everyone should exploit one.

> So when a man is raising his children on his own, 
> we act like he's doing something amazing. I mean, men 
> aren't supposed to be capable of doing that.

WHO SAYS THESE WOMEN ARE RAISING KIDS ON THEIR OWN?  

In the states and I'm sure in Sweden, there are armies of
social workers to assist her on top of the financial
support such women also usually receive.  

It's considered amazing, by astute observers, that fathers
are raising children on their own usually because the
other parent is usually dead or exceptionally negligent.
    
> > > > > > In the vast majority of divorces the woman
leaves the man. When a 
> > > > > > woman 
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > a single mother because she "wants to
find herself" or is not 
> > > > > > prepared 
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > make the compromises necessary to make a
marriage work then she has 
> > > > > > made a
> > > > > > selfish choice that is likely to harm her children.  
> > > > > >
> > > > > How do you know her reasons for leaving? 
> > > > 
> > > > Statistics have been posted that a majority of divorces occur
> > > > due to the woman citing mere irreconcilable differences or
> > > > have children as unwed mothers.
> > > >
> > > So? That mean nothing. You have no idea what's been 
> > > going on in that marriage before it ended. 
> > 
> > Waffle!
> > 
> > Note that we're not just talking about poor helpless single
> > mothers who've been "abandoned" here.  40% of
> > children are born out of wedlock altogether! 
> >
> I'm sorry, but all this "born out of wedlock" crap is 
> outdated. People can have committed relationships 
> without being married. 

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:21dUUwB8s0AJ:www.columbia.edu/cu/ssw
/projects/surcent/Publications/FF%2520Working%2520Papers/WP00-04-FF-McLan
ahan.pdf+unwed+parents+living+together&hl=en

According to this study, about half of these "partnerships"
are committed.  
 
> > > Unwed doesn't automatically mean single. I'm not 
> > > married, but I'm definitely not single either.
> > 
> > Yeah, your "current" partner helps out.
> >
> No, he doesn't "help out". We're raising our children 
> together, whether we're married or not

Good for both of you.

> > > > You might as well ask us if we know whether the sun will
> > > > come up tomorrow.
> > > > 
> > > Now you're just being silly. I expect better from you.
> > 
> > Indeed, we are being silly since we all know that most 
> > single mothers are that way due to a set of choices under
> > their control.  You can quibble and weasle but it's not
> > going to get you anywhere.  Is this the point where you
> > write "soc.men loser!" or somesuch and stalk away
> > or will you squirm for a while longer?
> >  
> I don't squirm, I yawn. I usualy don't read your posts 
> if it's not in a reply to me, because you're simply too 
> boring.

Probably because I'm not as easy to rile up as Andre or GA. :-)

> > > > > > I see nothing admirable
> > > > > > in this.  I do not assume that all single
mothers are in this 
> > > > > > situation
> > > > > > because of selfish choices.  I know for a
fact that some are not.  
> > > > > > However,
> > > > > > statistically speaking, many if not most are.
 Depriving children 
> > > > > > of 
> > > > > > their
> > > > > > fathers is a step that is taken far too
casually in this culture.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Jayne
> > > > > > 
> > > > > I almost agree with that. In some cases it's necessary 
> > > > > to keep the father out of the picture though and 
> > > > > sometimes both parents are too busy with their own hurt 
> > > > > feelings to take good care of their kids.
> > > > 
> > > > In some cases, women have killed their own children.
> > > >
> > > In some case men have killed their children. So what?
> > >  
> > > > Isn't it neat how the words "in some cases" can be used
> > > > in an ambiguous, misleading manner?  
> > > >
> > > There's nothing misleading with what I said, you just 
> > > like to pretend that all single mother are so by choice 
> > > and that they're evil because they try to steal your 
> > > taxmoney.
> > 
> > I never said all.  I said most and if you can show me
> > wrong, I will say I was wrong on that point and remember
> > it for future reference.
> > 
> Nope, you're too dishonest to say what you really feel.
> Your posts show quite clearly that you feel nothing but 
> disrespect for single mothers.

I'm game.  

My sister was a divorced mother and I have great respect for the 
struggles she went through.  She came out of it a better person.
I also have dated single mothers and respect what they went
through otherwise I wouldn't have gone out with them.

I'm even willing to feel compassion and respect for women
who make an honest mistake and have a sexual relationship
thinking everything will work out and wind up pregnant
and can't stomach getting an abortion.  

I'm perfectly willing to see state resources go to help
these women within reason.  That said, I have a lot
more compassion for these women than you do for the poor
bastard who has the wrong one night stand.

> > And yes, MEN are referred to as deadbeats and evil when
> > they consume taxpayer dollars even indirectly.  Welcome to equality.
> >
> The only men I refer to as deadbeats, are the ones who 
> don't take financial responsibility for their children, 
> and no, I don't think the cs system today is fair, so 
> you don't have to try to start a long boring discussion 
> about my views on that. 

Did I try to get into a discussion of the CS system's fairness? :-)

At least now you're using the proper term (money) and not pretending
that this is about "parenting" or any such noble thing.

Remember when you clucked out about me being rejected?
Yet, I'm quite a decent catch.  I produce a regular income,
don't beat up women, and can even go shoe shopping together
with the misses.

If I didn't get involved with women I didn't feel I could trust,
that shows something about my character.  I didn't bed down
women just to prove a stupid point.  

You needn't be nasty, but you could show some intelligence
and integrity and hold these women at least morally accountable
for the slimebags they slept with AND spawned copies of.  
It takes two, remember?

> > > > > Btw, statistics show that women file for divorce far 
> > > > > more often than men, it doesn't show the reasons for the 
> > > > > divorce though. My dad decided to do a runner when I was 
> > > > > 1 year old, my mother decided to file for a divorce 2 
> > > > > years later. IMO he broke up the marriage, even if the 
> > > > > 'statistic' would show that she did it.
> > > > 
> > > > Cites?
> > > >
> > > Um, you want cites from my parents divorce? 
> > 
> > Er, no.  I want a cite that shows that most single mothers
> > aren't that way due to their personal, and I'll even
> > give you this much leeway, uncoerced choice.  So far,
> > I can start with 40% of single unwed moms who have the
> > kid of their own choice and then we just need another 10%
> > of these divorces from that.  It doesn't seem that difficult,
> > does it?
> >
> Again, you have to prove that "unwed mothers" are single 
> for your claim to work.

About half and in some democraphics (especially those
dependent upon welfare) it's even higher.  Check out the study.
  
> > > Sure, I'll just call my mum or dad and ask them to dig 
> > > up some almost 30 year old paper, send it over to me so 
> > > I can scan them to prove to you, what exactly?
> > > I don't think so, that would just be ridiculous.
> > 
> > Indeed since I didn't ask you for that "cite" nor am I going
> > to prove that "all" single mothers are that way by
"choice".
> > You set up the tin ducks and I shoot them down.  Plink!
> > 
> You asked for a cite after I mentioned my parents 
> divorce, so try to be a bit more clear next time. I'm 
> not a mindreader just because I'm a woman.

And I haven't fathered any bastard children.  So deadbeat
dads don't exist as far as we need be concerned. :-)

regards,
Mark Sobolewski


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 2/1/05 10:10:54 PM ---