From: jsw@cray.com (Jon S. Wood)
Subject: Re: I HAD NO CHOICE ( was: Biological reaso
Reply-To: jsw@cray.com
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 23 Dec 92 12:34:31 CST

In article 4y44VB1w165w@dogear.spk.wa.us, bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us (Bob Kirkpatrick) writes:
>jsw@cray.com (Jon S. Wood) writes:
>
>>   The women who is sexually, mentally, and physically abused by her husband
>> should leave. Money and personal gain isn't on her list of priorities. 
>
>No, but in many of these situations the women are also afraid of losing
>their child, worried about where to go and how to survive. I've also
>seen those who have a deep ingrained sense of loyalty --stand by your
>spouse-- no matter what. When I began dealing with family law cases, I 
>found myself amazed that people weren't aware of the services and alter-
>natives available to get them out of the circumstances they're in.
>
  The people who are not aware of govt/non-govt. "services" is their
problem. Their "ingrained sense of loyalty" is their problem. Worried
people not knowing where to go or how to survive is their problem. How
far will the sympathetic elite go to assist the helpless and irresponsible
adults of our society before the last responsible adult goes broke paying
for it, leaves the country or becomes extinct? I believe the overwhelming
crush of "abuse victims" stories has created abuse victims that don't exist.
Two, this victim society has reached such epidemic proportions that our
social services groups have grown too big, too powerful and "Orwellien".
The big irony was that I always thought it came from the Rev. "Right" side
of the political arena, but the reality is that this big brother with
good intentions is destroying us clothed in Arkansas jogging wear.

 Our current social policy, agrieving every perceived injustice by enacting
more restrictive laws in the name of equality and fairness is the most
powerful drain and downward spiral of social stability. 

>> Not all women are helpless.

     and even those who are helpless. How much and how far can we go?
 Now that we have Casino gambling in our area, I have seriously thought
of setting up a 'counseling clinic' to reap millions of dollars in 
Medicare monies to support all the retirees who blew their entire
savings on high stakes binge and slot machines. Personally, I say 
the federal government warning sticker soon to be mandated on the 
Indian Gaming groups (woops, the federal govt. will be sued by the 
Indians because of the soverign nation treaty violation) to be placed
on the outside of the door will say "WARNING: COMPULSIVE GAMBLING IS
HARMFUL TO YOUR FINANCIAL SECURITY". Naw, just kidding. THe real 
government mandated sign will read, "WARNING: IF YOU LOSE ALL YOUR
SAVINGS HERE, DON"T PANIC, CALL 1-800-US-BUCK FOR FREE GOVERNMENT
ASSISTANCE".  Get my drift. I say if Granny gambles, Granny loses. 
It's affectionately referred to by my father as "TOUGH SHIT!".

>
>But those who cannot extract themselves from abusive circumstances are
>a lot more helpless than you might imagine. If you think about it, the
>helplessness they manifest is defined by their inability to leave.

 Don't necessarily buy it, and secondly, what do you propose to do to
change it without spending several million dollars per county.

>
>> It is also a crime to assault people.
>
>It's also a crime to falsely accuse people, but it's becomming a very
>common facet of family law.

 It's also illegal in Mpls to park your horse in front of resteraunts.
The problem is, no one enforces it. Lest the Amish came into town (wrong)
there the only group I can think of in America that honestly not only
doesn't ask for govt. help, they loathe it.
 Falsely accusing people of just about anything today is the NORM.

 Girl who was removed as capt. of the Cheerleader sqaud in Bumbleep Iowa
is suing the school board for not less than 4.5 million dollars, emotional
trauma....... 

>
>> Abuse awards no one, it punishes assualters for those who can prove it in 
>> court.
>
>If it goes to court. Oftentimes it doesn't.

 Yup.

>
>> Assault is punishable.
>> Mental abuse ISN"T. 
>> Mental abuse is a made for t.v. movie that display's women like feminists' 
>>  wish them to be; victims who need MORE rights than others. Personally, 
>>  I think feminists are mistaken. Women are much smarter than that.
>
>Whoa. Mental abuse (more commonly called Emotional Abuse) has a prevalence
>in America unrivaled in any other country. It is an actionable offense, as
>you pointed out earlier, if it can be proven in court. Emotional abuse has
>many faces too. From telling someone repeatedly that they have no value,
>to making threats with no substance, but are believed by the victim. Emo-
>tional abuse is responsible for a tremendous amount of damage.

  Mental/emotional abuse is OVERUSED and is reaching epidemic proportions. It is 
got to be the most wishy washy crap in 99% of the cases. 
 This is making lawyers rich, liberal elitists' feel good, destroying 
civil liberties and gives excuses to those who generally don't need them.
Dahmer was abused. Shoot the bastard anyway. 
 Evil exists. D.A's can't stop it.

>
>To label it as a "made for tv movie" is hardly accurate, Jon. The abuse is
>so destructive, that we're waking up to the fact that it's responsible for
>a significant portion of child suicides. Earlier this year I had a young
>boy as a client --he killed himself. His father wanted no part of him and
>his mother was an alcoholic. He made it clear that he believed that he had
>no value at all. Just when we got him placed with relatives, he committed
>suicide. Emotional abuse is no 'movie.'

 A young girl suing the school board for 4.5 million will probably be
a made for t.v. movie. Now every wronged cheerleader in America can
see for themselves their plight is as unjust as hers and therefore
sue her school.

>
>> It is not a crime to claim large amounts of a husband's money because the 
>> boyfriends dick has more money (divorce awards women, punishes men all in
>> the name of children). The system isn't working Amy. 
>
>That's more or less true. (I don't argue that the system is broken, but I
>take exception to your generalization.) PEOPLE are screwed by the family
>law system all the time. Men are, and women are.

 Generalization yes. The statistics, what little we have suggests otherwise.
 
>
>If it's at all possible, we need to try to focus the anger of our divorces
>towards the right party. Many of the women who use the system as a weapon
>do so with the encouragement of that system. If the law was intelligently
>written and approached, we'd see a lot less of the crap. Many of the men
>who used the system as a weapon --or it's loopholes to slide, do so again
>with the encouragement of the system. Action/reaction, cause/effect.
>
>It's weird science, to be sure. But grant me this --the overall number of
>people hurt by our systems of family law vastly outweigh the feminists,
>conservatives, or traditionalists. To help them in their quest to keep
>the genders off balance and at each other's throats is a little foolish.

Yes and no. I feel powerless whenever I come within 50 feet of a family
court room because it is a legislated fact. I will continue to expose the
feminist's double standard and hypocracy every chance I can. For their
premise is false, because if it was true, women are indeed the inferior
gender.

>
>Happy Holidays!
>
>--- 
>Bob Kirkpatrick <bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us>
>Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA 


 Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

 Jon Wood 

 Can't wait to go skating with the kiddies.

 
Newsgroups: alt.child-support