Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: K-Mark Hostages
From: rivero@mdcbbs.com
Date: 15 Sep 92 09:34:07 GMT
 <1992Sep11.161645.10192@walter.cray.com> <1992Sep14.160750.28102@news.nd.edu>
Organization: Electronic Data Systems, Unigraphics Division, Cypress CA
Nntp-Posting-User: rivero

In article <1992Sep14.160750.28102@news.nd.edu>, slarsen@monet.helios.nd.edu (susan larsen) writes:
> In article <1992Sep11.161645.10192@walter.cray.com> jsw@cray.com (Jon S. Wood) writes:
>>
>>---much deleted---
> 
>>Let me come over to your house and evict YOU. Take your kid(s) and
>>make you pay me 30% of your after tax income to me. Believe you me, 
>>I'd keep my gun loaded at night, knowing damn well you'd come
>>after me. Why? You can run to the coppers or run to a judge, 
>>they'll only laugh at ya. 
>>But p.c. sue, we'll move on and forget about it. Won't ya Sue.
> 
> I would not take a weapon to the father of my child or any 
> strangers, under these circumstances.  Angry, most certainly.
> But I would take out my anger by working for change.......
> and of course, posting to the net.
> 
> Violent acts only serve to remind the public of their 
> stereotypical notions about men:  "Oh, your honor, we know 
> that all men are capable of taking up weapons when they 
> are under stress.  Yet another reason why those beasts 
> should not have free access to children. Why, just look 
> at the papers, full of stories about men shooting up courtrooms, 
> stores, ex-wives."  
> 
> Violence will never convince the public and the courts that 
> fathers are, indeed, capable parents.

  And yet, the woman who participate in "burning bed" type killings are
held up as heroines in the war against male oppression! Of course, with the
two most recent male victims of such crimes here in LA inhabiting a wheelchair
and being only 3 years old respectivly, the justifications for such human
arsons wears thin indeed.  Yet the feminist media spin that (correctly) 
condemns violence by men against women while condoning violence by women 
against men persists.

  While you yourself might not resort to violence, clearly we cannot use 
your lone pacifist example to make assumptions about other
women. Last Labor Day weekend, there was an incident in the apartment building
across the street where a woman who had lost custody of her two children
(one assumes there must have been a good reason, given the court bias)
showed up unexpectedly and found her ex and the kids sharing dinner with
his new ladylove. Whether this was her original intent is not known, but
she drew a small caliber automatic pistol and emptied the clip in the general
direction of the dining table. Among her other failings as a human being, she
was (fortunatly) a lousy shot, as no one was injured. While totally
ineffective, this was still a violent act (maybe she'll start a fire next
time).

  After David Brenner finaly won custody of his son from the drug abusing
mother, she kidnapped the child and vanoshed, aided by citizens who
firmly believe that the child is best off with the mother, no matter what.
Fathers who violate court ordered custoidy by kidnapping go to jail. As is
typical of the pro-female bias, no charges were ever brought against the
woman in the Brenner case. Regardless of the court's not filing a charge,
kidnapping is still kidnapping whether it's a man or women, mother or father.

  The problem (and unfairness) is in trying to condemn such acts in the case
of one gender while justifying them in the other.


<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
|  Michael Rivero        rivero@dev8j.mdcbbs.com     "A Human's Human!"  |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|                       I CAME,  I SAW,  I DIVORCED                      |
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Newsgroups: soc.men