Do you think someone could hate their spouse so much, they'd try to do anything to hurt their ex? Like heckle women at court, harass women at their homes, send letters to women's neighbours claiming they had corrupted their children?
"The man in black who sees red":
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/12/19/1040174344351.html
"For Abbott, leader of Blackshirts, a Men's Rights group, those who leave a marriage - and they are now mainly women - are evil. It is a sentiment that seeks to bypass the 1970s, when feminism first rocked the pillars of patriarchy. Then, women stayed home, & stayed in bad marriages. Now, they work & opt out of poor partnerships more frequently than do men. Some men, particularly those who are middle-aged & unskilled, have found this hard to accept. But, whereas many men's groups complain about it, the Blackshirts harass and intimidate. Abbott says his campaign is all about the children, but does not explain how threats will help." Rights or revenge?
2007-11-03 07:20:57 · 10 answers · asked by edith clarke 7 in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
yes, they are trying to get back at their ex-wives and women in general.
there are over 500 of these groups in the world.
someone asked that we try to understand their actions - we are. there is research and articles about their behavior. most of these men had bitter divorces and had custody battles. many of them were batterers. they try to control their ex-wives and lower their child support - the idea that they want joint custody is pure rubbish (lots of normal guys do, sure, but these guys aren't normal). they are hate groups. they write letters, do publicity stunts, lobby politicians.
there are also second wives in these clubs - mainly b/c lower child support to the first family benefits them.
as for the you tube video - there is no context to it, for one. perhaps they are at a fathers rights group meeting that is talking about battered men? these men have spread lies that DV is equally perpetrated by women - no credible source proves this - they have their own 'research' - TACTS scale that measures nagging & running up credit cards as violence - thus diminishing it - parental alienation syndrome that no credible source (NIH & APA) acknowledges - they sue DV shelters - want to punish women for false allegations, etc..etc.
yes, they are hell bent on attacking women, feminists in partciular, and setting back time to when men controlled women.
2007-11-03 08:48:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
1
2016-05-06 02:17:22 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's all about revenge. It's all about misogyny.
If there are men out there who are adamant about wasting a lot of precious time and energy getting back at their ex-wives, these men have the problem, not the ex-wives. These men have no peace in their own lives. Because of that, they refuse to let their ex-wives have peace in theirs. These men think: "Why should they be happy while we're not? It's not fair! They're going to pay for that!" (I heard on a news broadcast several years ago that a man shot and killed his ex-wife, their children, and her new husband. Then he turned the gun on himself and died. He wasn't happy; so he took that unhappiness out on his ex-wife. This was very sad. His unhappiness wasn't her problem. In no way could she be blamed for that. If he refused to move on with his life, that was on him, not anyone else.)
I see a double standard at work here: If a man leaves a marriage, that's O.K. because "he's the man." He doesn't need a valid reason. He can leave on a whim if he wants. When it comes to domestic violence, he can't be blamed because "she made me do it." (If he beats up on her and she resists and fights back to protect and defend herself, she somehow becomes the perpetrator, he, the victim. She's not supposed to defend herself. She's supposed to take the beating "like a real woman." If, for some reason, a woman whips up on a man, now that's domestic violence! In other words, it's only domestic violence if the woman commits it, not a man.) Now, let a woman leave a marriage. She's every four-letter (or more) word in the book. As if she cannot leave a marriage under any circumstances--not even with a valid reason. She's not supposed to leave a bad marriage?? I guess it's because she's female.
The Blackshirts are all about power, dominance, and control. Their victims--their ex-wives. If they're so full of hatred toward them, it's not their ex-wives' fault. It's the men's own fault if they're unhappy and not at peace.
2007-11-03 08:04:34 · answer #3 · answered by Shafeeqah 5 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Getting back at the ex is not what fathers' rights groups are all about. I dont know about the Blackshirts but if they were truly harassing, the women would have gotten restraining orders. There are cases of both men and women spending all their time and energy trying to get back at their ex but these are usually people with personality disorders. Both partners have rights and should be treated fairly. If children are involved, their well being should be the main concern.
2007-11-03 07:32:07 · answer #4 · answered by Diane M 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qodygTkTUYM Here feminists disrupt a conference for battered men - charming, huh?.
It seems that some feminists also heckle, harass, threaten violence etc. What about academics who receive death threats for studying violence against men? But you don't want to focus on these things, right? You'll probably say "feminists don't do this" (no true scotsman fallacy) or "that's just a lunatic fringe". In terms of the latter, what's the difference between that and what you're asking? Or are you committing the "asociation fallacy" by showing an extreme example and using it to put a cloud over all father's rights groups?
At the end of the day, "feminism" is advocacy just like "men's rights". There are always going to be certain elements that want to resort to intimidation to further their aims. If you want to point out bad behaviour of father's groups, then it's only good manners to recognise bad behaviour inside your own movement. Don't you think?
2007-11-03 08:10:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
This isn't really a real question, is it?
I haven't followed the link, but from what the quote says, it isn't a men's rights group, but something else CALLING itself men's rights. But then, the quote itself is poorly thought-out, mixing up several distinct thing, and relying on stereotypes.
Any person who harasses another person is wrong.
Why do they do it? They are people who like to control others, and can't accept that they can no longer control THIS person.
What is it that you want to know or understand? I suspect, nothing, and that you are abusing this site to make a statement. If that's the case, start a blog, this site is supposed to be for questions and answers.
2007-11-03 08:30:26 · answer #6 · answered by tehabwa 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Ask that question after someone has stolen your child because they have more rights than you. You will find that you won't be asking that question.
Sometimes people do use children as a weapon against their ex-partner but most of the time that I see it, it is the woman that is doing it.
2007-11-05 19:01:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Apparently, some men are so frustrated with legal outcomes that this is how they're reacting.
Do you feel that society is in any way culpable in bringing this behavior on? Rather than blame them for their actions (which I neither condone nor condemn), could you at least ask what is driving them to it? After all, at the very least, you'd do that for women and minorities, wouldn't you?
2007-11-03 08:12:34 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Sick, he needs help (counseling), he's in denile, and is a hypocrite...
he claims...
"...his campaign is all about the children... "
but then says...
"Our aim is to shame women..."
2007-11-03 08:14:38 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
I had always thought that these groups were for equal treatment under the law
2007-11-03 07:30:43 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 5⤋