Damn good points.
If you'll notice a group like NOW justifies the slanted child custody cases by making it seem as though they're saving children from abusive dads.
This PDF from their site:
http://legalmomentum.org/pub/DV11Resources.pdf
...Has things like this to say about child custody:
"Yes. Child custody disputes are very often a continuation of domestic abuse, particularly after a woman has left her batterer."
VERY OFTEN? Interesting that no statistics are used. No, you can just make blanket statements without verification that "very often" men are abusive.
They continue to deny the fact that some women lie about domestic violence to gain custody:
"Unfortunately, some judges still adhere to the myth that women use allegations of domestic violence to either get even with or lash out at the other parent in order to gain an upper hand
in a case."
So it's a "myth" that some women lie about abuse. I wonder how they can attest that not ONE woman has ever lied about abuse. False allegations are not "myths." Ask the Duke lacrosse players about that.
Well, they then turn around to insist that "batterers" are the only ones capable of making false allegations:
"Batterers who deny that they are abusive will often
attempt to establish that they are actually the victims of
abuse."
Yup, women NEVER make false allegations. Men OFTEN do.
I wonder exactly how they can prove these assertions. Oh, right... men are evil, women are victims. Feminism 101
"Oh, but they fight for "equality." "Not all feminists are like that."
Well pardon me, but how are we supposed to even know that when a group like NOW that boasts they are:
"the largest, most comprehensive feminist advocacy group in the United States. Our purpose is to take action to bring women into full participation in society — sharing equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities with men, while living free from discrimination."
Pretty reasonable sounding, isn't it. Souns alot like the "feminism is about equality" we're used to hearing. But look to what the groups ACTUALLY advocate & do before you look to only the things they claim & before you use the old definition for the modern movement.
2007-10-25 00:51:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by hopscotch 5
·
5⤊
1⤋
personally, I have never advocated a quota system. changes from above like that only serve to cause resentment and the eventual development of individuals such as yourself. I believe that the change needs to be a societal and perceptual change and that is what I work for in the professional world.
In the cases of courts, those are an aspect of public services and government where the people have a say. In the professional world, you are mostly dealing with private business. In a court system, it is feasible to put a system of examination like that in place. In private busnesses, it isnt.
2007-10-25 01:46:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by bluestareyed 5
·
0⤊
3⤋
All very good points old boy, and reasonably well stated too.
In my experience pointing out someone's inconsistant behaviour normally just irritates them, but nothing changes, other than the attitude of increased hostility towards you, the male who had the temerity to actually think about what women were doing.
Women want what they want, when they want it, in the quantities, colours, and styles that they want.
God help the man that gets in their way!
2007-10-24 23:41:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by Schtupa 4
·
7⤊
2⤋
Correct where discrimination/good reasons favours women feminists justify it.
Where discrimination/good reasons favours men feminists attack it as the work of the mysterious patriarchy.
2007-10-25 00:04:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by georgebonbon 4
·
7⤊
2⤋
Wow, Hopscotch gets my vote for B/A.... Awesome response :o)
2007-10-25 02:06:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
I don't understand what is being asked?
2007-10-25 06:30:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by professorc 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
That is not true today. Many times men are giving custody even when they shouldn't.
2007-10-24 23:40:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
10⤋
whats your question?
2007-10-24 23:38:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
5⤋