Author Topic: Injustice in the Feminist Modern World (Read 5379 times)

Matthew · « **on:** September 09, 2012, 05:30:27 PM »

Here's a good one, that we heard about PERSONALLY and not on the Internet. A family member related this to us about one of her co-workers:

A young man was dating a young woman, and during their "dating years" they had a baby together. Her parents were strongly against her marriage to the young man. Apparently her desire to be married to the man wasn't very strong, as she seems to have gone along with their wishes for these past 3 years.

The child is now 3 years old. She now has a new boyfriend whom she is planning to marry.

Here's where it gets outrageous...

The young man wanted to marry her from the get-go, but the parents were against it. However, rather than just letting him go, he was taken to court and made to pay child support! He's been paying child support for these past 3 years, and will continue to do so FOR THE NEXT FIFTEEN YEARS.

And yes, that includes next year and onward, after the young lady in question gets married to her new boyfriend.

HOW in the world can that be considered justice?

If he is paying for the child's support, he should get full custody, not just visitation rights here and there.

But, as you can see, the world is VERY skewed in a feminist direction. It seems that the world is set against men. Men are at a distinct disadvantage today.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #1 on:** September 09, 2012, 05:37:11 PM »

The decisive point here Matthew is that the girl's parents act as though it's perfectly fine to refuse marriage to the father of her baby. To show disrespect and contempt for the father of their grandchild.

They are shameless, and have raised a daughter without shame.

The young woman of course is responsible, but with parents like hers, it's not at all surprising she's doing what she's doing.

Sede Catholic · « **Reply #2 on:** September 09, 2012, 05:40:02 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

...
But, as you can see, the world is VERY skewed in a feminist direction. It seems that the world is set against men. Men are at a distinct disadvantage today.

Yes, Matthew. That sums it up.

The events which befell that unfortunate young man show the incredible grip which Feminism has over the legal system, and over society as a whole.

Feminists, and their male lackeys, have ensured that there is an obvious and undeniable bias against men.

That bias against men can only help to destroy the Christian concept of the family.

Sede Catholic · « **Reply #3 on:** September 09, 2012, 05:46:35 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

The decisive point here Matthew is that the girl's parents act as though it's perfectly fine to refuse marriage to the father of her baby. To show disrespect and contempt for the father of their grandchild.

They are shameless, and have raised a daughter without shame.

The young woman of course is responsible, but with parents like hers, it's not at all surprising she's doing what she's doing.

That is a very important point, Tele.

The girl's parents did not want her to marry the father of her own child!!!!!!!!

What?

What kind of parents are they?

How far away are those parents from any concept of normal morality?

Traditional Catholic teachings bring sanity to everything. When they are ignored, the result is madness.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #4 on:** September 09, 2012, 06:08:15 PM »

Quote from: Sede Catholic

The girl's parents did not want her to marry the father of her own child!!!!!!!!

What?

What kind of parents are they?

They don't have a traditional sense of honor. Just a bourgeois baby-boomer conception of it. So the idea of their daughter marrying someone they don't like is far more disconcerting to them than having their grandchild grow up without his father.

Unfortunately this attitude is not uncommon. There are many grandparents who want the son-in-law out of the picture for someone "better" or even to substitute themselves and be "dad again" - I've literally heard that said. - and the fact that a child won't be legitimate and won't grow up with their father doesn't phase them in the least. They have absorbed feminism into the marrow of their bones.

Elizabeth · « **Reply #5 on:** September 09, 2012, 06:18:17 PM »

True. Feminism robs us all of a traditional sense of honor.

Nadir · « **Reply #6 on:** September 09, 2012, 06:44:08 PM »

Yes, the man was considered worthy of "dating" their daughter, and his money is not too smelly...

This is a sad and tragic story. And repeated ad nauseam

It defies all decency.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #7 on:** September 09, 2012, 06:49:26 PM »

Quote from: Nadir

Yes, the man was considered worthy of "dating" their daughter

Yes, they don't care about her purity - excellent point.

A lot of these parents don't really care about the reality, just the reputation.

And their concept of "reputation" doesn't depend on the appearance of moral virtue and responsiblity - no - odds are money is what matters to them.

Elizabeth · « **Reply #8 on:** September 09, 2012, 06:50:44 PM »

Right, so the the man paying child support will have to find a girl with a job, if they want to have children. It's so wicked. And if he looses his job, she will have to support them so he doesn't get jail time.

spouse of Jesus · « **Reply #9 on:** September 09, 2012, 07:22:48 PM »

Feminism is for men who don't want to do the hard work of being a manly man. I see in my own Country how the weak-willed soft lustful guys are actually pushing ladies into feminism. Being a patriarch requires lots of courage and diligence.
In a patriarchal society a man has to try hard to have access to a woman. He has to be worthy, have moral character and good reputation and be capable of raising a family or the girl and her family will reject him. If he wants a second wife or more he has to prove he can handle extra responsibilities. If he seduces and deflowers a girl he has to pay the price, if he visits an infamous house he has to keep it secret or own honor is lost.
But thanks to feminism a man for the first time in history can have it for free. because only an ''emancipated open minded'' woman can be cheap and easy to get. Why not be a couch potato and spend the whole day before TV while somebody else financially provides for him, sɛҳuąƖly satisfies him without him having to trouble himself with anything?
Long long age even a king had to pay a high price if he desired to add a wife to his harem, nowadays the lowliest guys can have easy access to lots of women. Also, a free modern woman will not disturb a man's ease and comfort by giving birth to babies, she won't require him to grow up and think seriously. she lets him stay immature and have fun, play video games everyday without worrying about anything.
Those male feminists hate pure women and they want to see all ladies impure and immodest. why? because culturally speaking (in my Country at least) a man who marries a virgin is obliged to be considerate and delicate in the beginning of marriage and put up with her inexperience treating her like a vulnerable fresh flower. But a modern godless man never has enough tolerance and patience for it. so he mocks pure girls.
I am not saying it is all men's fault. but males are also an important part of feminism movement.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #10 on:** September 09, 2012, 07:36:40 PM »

Quote

In a patriarchal society a man has to try hard to have access to a woman.

Most still do have to try hard, only it's a different kind of trying that's required. That's the problem. Men who are motivated by emotion, by the desire for family often pay a huge penalty for it, men who are motivated by callous selfishness on the other hand often have a relatively free hand.

There's something else to consider. In the past women were expected to marry. This meant that pairing off would naturally occur within a reasonable time frame, and it also encouraged society to ensure that young men could find employment, otherwise there wouldn't be husbands for their daughters.

As it stands now it really is harder for the typical man to get a decent woman. Certainly to find a woman worth marrying.

When men are accused of "not trying" one should ask whether perhaps many have been robbed of the incentive.

A man can be training to be a brain surgeon and still struggle to find a decent woman. Most women today are just incredibly shallow. Catching them is like catching a bird. And they are bird-brained.

Sigismund · « **Reply #11 on:** September 09, 2012, 10:26:16 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

The decisive point here Matthew is that the girl's parents act as though it's perfectly fine to refuse marriage to the father of her baby. To show disrespect and contempt for the father of their grandchild.

They are shameless, and have raised a daughter without shame.

The young woman of course is responsible, but with parents like hers, it's not at all surprising she's doing what she's doing.

That pretty much sums it up.

The father of the child is morally responsible for the care of the child, but it seems that he wanted to do his best to fulfill that duty in the best ways possible. I wonder if he fought for custody. In most states he would have no chance unless the mother was breathtakingly unfit.

PartyIsOver221 · « **Reply #12 on:** September 10, 2012, 12:37:18 AM »

Quote from: spouse of Jesus

Feminism is for men who don't want to do the hard work of being a manly man. I see in my own Country how the weak-willed soft lustful guys are actually pushing ladies into feminism. Being a patriarch requires lots of courage and diligence.
In a patriarchal society a man has to try hard to have access to a woman. He has to be worthy, have moral character and good reputation and be capable of raising a family or the girl and her family will reject him. If he wants a second wife or more he has to prove he can handle extra responsibilities. If he seduces and deflowers a girl he has to pay the price, if he visits an infamous house he has to keep it secret or own honor is lost.
But thanks to feminism a man for the first time in history can have it for free. because only an ''emancipated open minded'' woman can be cheap and easy to get. Why not be a couch potato and spend the whole day before TV while somebody else financially provides for him, sɛҳuąƖly satisfies him without him having to trouble himself with anything?
Long long age even a king had to pay a high price if he desired to add a wife to his harem, nowadays the lowliest guys can have easy access to lots of women. Also, a free modern woman will not disturb a man's ease and comfort by giving birth to babies, she won't require him to grow up and think seriously. she lets him stay immature and have fun, play video games everyday without worrying about anything.
Those male feminists hate pure women and they want to see all ladies impure and immodest. why? because culturally speaking (in my Country at least) a man who marries a virgin is obliged to be considerate and delicate in the beginning of marriage and put up with her inexperience treating her like a vulnerable fresh flower. But a modern godless man never has enough tolerance and patience for it. so he mocks pure girls.
I am not saying it is all men's fault. but males are also an important part of feminism movement.

True

Tiffany · « **Reply #13 on:** September 10, 2012, 04:03:58 AM »

Quote from: Sigismund

Quote from: Telesphorus
The decisive point here Matthew is that the girl's parents act as though it's perfectly fine to refuse marriage to the father of her baby. To show disrespect and contempt for the father of their grandchild.

They are shameless, and have raised a daughter without shame.

The young woman of course is responsible, but with parents like hers, it's not at all surprising she's doing what she's doing.

That pretty much sums it up.

The father of the child is morally responsible for the care of the child, but it seems that he wanted to do his best to fulfill that duty in the best ways possible. I wonder if he fought for custody. In most states he would have no chance unless the mother was breathtakingly unfit.

Many states are 50/50.

Tiffany · « **Reply #14 on:** September 10, 2012, 04:21:56 AM »

Quote from: Matthew

Here's a good one, that we heard about PERSONALLY and not on the Internet. A family member related this to us about one of her co-workers:

A young man was dating a young woman, and during their "dating years" they had a baby together. Her parents were strongly against her marriage to the young man. Apparently her desire to be married to the man wasn't very strong, as she seems to have gone along with their wishes for these past 3 years.

The child is now 3 years old. She now has a new boyfriend whom she is planning to marry.

Here's where it gets outrageous...

The young man wanted to marry her from the get-go, but the parents were against it. However, rather than just letting him go, he was taken to court and made to pay child support! He's been paying child support for these past 3 years, and will continue to do so FOR THE NEXT FIFTEEN YEARS.

And yes, that includes next year and onward, after the young lady in question gets married to her new boyfriend.

HOW in the world can that be considered justice?

If he is paying for the child's support, he should get full custody, not just visitation rights here and there.

But, as you can see, the world is VERY skewed in a feminist direction. It seems that the world is set against men. Men are at a distinct disadvantage today.

Instead of just letting him go?

It is his child, there is no letting him go. He has an obligation to support the child and has rights as the child's father. It is not up to the grandparents to "let him go" there are legal ties between him and the child. In general the courts will not bastardize a child.

You are arguing he should not support his child because things did not work out with the mother? Every man should have full custody because he pays child support?

I believe there is a great deal of bias against men at times in family court, especially when dealing with unscrupulous women. Not knowing more info on this case, a man having to pay child support for his child born out of wedlock doesn't seem like one of them.

You are painting him as a victim here. He fathered a child out of wedlock. A man engaging in relations with a woman of child bearing age married or unmarried needs to be open to the possibility that he will be paying child support for 18 years and possibly more in some cases. A man supporting his children is right.

Her not marrying him and the attitude of women towards marriage is a different issue.