Thursday, November 10, 2005

Should I Apologize For Being Angry?

An interesting post on Blogwonks about being angry over unjust treatment. Should one apologize for being angry in these cases? No, those who are not angry, on the other hand, should be ashamed.

An excerpt (my emphasis):

There is a huge and growing roll of fallen men who have given their very lives because they have suffered massive personal and/or shared damage to their families, their finances and their reputations...Men who, like my own father, have placed shotguns in their mouths. Men who have burned themselves to death in protests. Men who have jumped off bridges. Men who have starved themselves in hunger strikes. Men who have lost their sanity...Men who have gassed themselves in cars. Men stripped of their families, children and reputations...Men who have watched helplessly as crippling child support payments have destroyed their ability to earn or keep a business running. Men who have been sent to jail for “waving” at their children in a passing car and so found themselves in breach of a “no contact order.” Men trapped in horrifying and savagely abusive relationships they cannot escape from or find any help to manage, because the system set up by women, for women, will not allow them in. Men being forced to pay child support for children they did not father... Just how damn patient do they want us to be?


Anonymous said...

How about men who are forced to pay child support long after their children are grown? There is an alarming new trend in which men in their 60's 70's and 80's are suddenly being charged for alleged back child support from 40 or more years ago despite the fact no one keeps records that long.

John Doe said...

The only appropriate word for this is predation.

Anonymous said...

Predation is a good term but I prefer to think of it as "predatory behavior". It is quite obvious the reason this is happening is because fewer and fewer people are choosing to marry and have children. Since there are fewer children for child support enforcement to charge support for, they need to increase their profits by creating cases in which men who are retired or near retirement are forced to give up their pensions, social security payments, property and other assets to an organization (generally a private, for profit one), that has no business taking these things away from them anyway, since there is no legal way they can even prove money could still be owed after so many years. I live in the US and the states in the US do not keep child support payment records longer than 7 years before they are purged. Most states do not keep them for more than 5. So how can child support enforcement truthfully claim their "records" indicate that child support payments were not made 20, 30, 40 or more years ago?

Blog Archive