Tuesday, November 01, 2005

Victim? Yeah, Right

The big Democrat talking point concerning Michael Alito's Supreme Court nomination is his upholding a law stating that a woman had to consult with her husband before having an abortion.

I actually saw one "horrified" female talking head say that the law stated that the woman had to get permission from her husband! Oh, the horror! If it were true, which it's not.

You know, something that I never hear debated in the whole "abortion rights" issue is, why doesn't the man have any say in the matter? After all, that child is as much his as it is hers, isn't it?

I realize that it's an incredibly thorny issue with no good solution, but should that 'little' fact be ignored? It is never brought up in any discussion.

The second that the sperm cell penetrates that egg, all of his rights are gone. Period. End of discussion.

If he wants the baby and she doesn't, tough bounce, pal. We're sucking it out whether you like it or not.

If she wants the baby and he doesn't, tough bounce, pal. You're going to pay for it for the next eighteen years (maybe longer), no matter what. Maybe we'll even let you see the kid sometime.

The Feminists have managed to portray a majority of people in this country (e.g. females) as a minority deserving of "victimhood" status and protection from the Left. Yeah, right.

I don't know what its like where you live, but here in Minnesota, once a man impregnates a woman he's the one who gets screwed. And if he gets married, doubly so.

If she decides that she wants a divorce, for any reason, 90% of the time the guy ends up moving out of his house and giving up his kids. 90%!!! Can you possibly imagine the outcry if those figures were reversed and she was the one who lost the house and kids 90% of the time? But that will never happen, because men will never be able to overcome the stereotype as abusive brutes who give the woman no choice but to kick him out.

The sad part is that, from looking at hundreds of divorces among friends and aquaintances, it usually seems to be the woman who files for divorce. She either gets bored because she's not living a "soap-opera" life full of drama and romance, or because she starts to see the big four-oh (40) looming on the horizon and files for divorce so that she can remain 18 forever.

Contrary to the Feminist talking points, abuse is seldom the reason that a woman files for divorce.

The only chance that men have, and ironically I was "lucky" in this regard, is "extreme" circumstances of addiction and/or abuse. That's it. Period. A woman can say, "I want a divorce" with no explanation and she will almost always get the house and the kids.

If you're a guy, you'd better have documentation and witnesses aplenty before you even think about applying for a divorce.

In my case, I had to put my daughter through two years of absolute chaos before I even dared to file for divorce.

In that time, I had documented 5 trips to detox, countless lost jobs, 2 or 3 failed rehabs and multiple police visits to our house (including the time she broke her hand on my head and then asked me for a ride to the hospital. Now that was funny!).

I had witnesses to witness my witnesses, including her own mother.

I asked my lawyer what the odds were that I'd get custody of my daughter. His answer? Oh, about 80%. 80 pardon-my-language-fucking-percent!

If she had wanted a divorce, all she would have had to do is go find a lawyer and file the case. That's it. No documentation, no witnesses, nothing. And she would have gotten the house and the kid.

Remember that next time you hear some Feminazi whining about the "Patriarchy".

Equal protection under the law, my ass.

No comments:

Post a Comment