Thursday, June 29, 2006

Albany Courts: Slowly being Turned into the “Island of Broken Toys”

Excuse me but isn’t the appropriate remedy for incorrectly applying the law due to bias termination of employment?

Why in the heck is it considered okay to transfer any of these characters up to the courts in Albany?

People in Albany don’t want them up there in their courts either making biased rulings against women. Why should they be stuck with this group of losers from Westchester county?

Upstate New York already has its own homegrown loser court officials, it doesn’t need to import any from Westchester county. These people should have their employment terminated and be forced to look for other lines of work. God only knows how many women and childrens’ lives they’ve destroyed already down in Westchester county, now you want to turn them loose on another unsuspecting group of innocent women, this time up in Albany?


Do us all a favor and send them packing…

The Journal News

Westchester's matrimonial courts undergo shakeup

(Original publication: June 23, 2006)
WHITE PLAINS — A review prompted by complaints of unfair handling of divorce cases has led to a shake-up of Westchester's matrimonial courts, the state court system announced yesterday.

Surrogate Anthony Scarpino was named supervising judge of the divorce courts and several judges handling matrimonial cases were reassigned. The role of special referees who mediate divorces will also be curtailed, said David Bookstaver, a spokesman for the state Office of Court Administration.

The review began in March in the wake of a feud between Westchester County Judge Francis Nicolai, the administrative judge of the 9th Judicial District, and special referee James Montagnino. Court officials announced yesterday that Montagnino has been transferred to the 3rd Judicial District in Albany.

Montagnino, a former county prosecutor and longtime court system employee, had been accused by several litigants of treating them unfairly. Several female plaintiffs took particular offense at a lecture he gave at Pace Law School two years ago in which he discussed the "10583 Syndrome," a reference to Scarsdale's zip code. He was talking about the mentality of stay-at-home mothers in upscale communities having a sense of entitlement to huge divorce settlements from their wealthy husbands.

Montagnino insisted that the comment was taken out of context from a discussion of the distribution of assets and that he was not biased against women and treated all litigants appropriately. He questioned the timing of the investigation, saying it was in response to his own criticism of Nicolai.

The shake-up led to the removal of state Supreme Court justices W. Denis Donovan, Bruce Tolbert and Richard Liebowitz from the matrimonial courts. Justices Linda Jamieson and Lewis Lubell will now handle divorce cases and Justice William Giacomo will continue to handle matrimonial trials, but will be reassigned to another court, Bookstaver said.

More Gender Neutralized Feminists Running Riot in Courthouses Across Western Civilization

What kind of unprincipled monsters would separate two four-years olds from their mother? I mean even Islamic Sharia law recognizes the primacy of the mother/child bond for the first 7 to 9 years of a child’s life. Yet in the heart of western civilization mothers and children don’t get as much respect as mothers in Islam get from your ordinary man-on-the-street terrorist.

I see the handprint of gender-neturalized feminists (whose best friend is probably a cat) splashed all over this ruling.

This case actually reminds me of of our own Bridget Marks case here in the US. Where the mother was first dragged through the mud by insidious accusations of possible paternity fraud, then when the DNA test came back positive, the recreational sperm donor then turned the whole thing around and sued for custody and WON…

Sadly for this mother and her five year old twins, unlike the Marks situation, they got no relief at the appellate level.

The interesting aspects of this case to me are that the father divorced the mother WHILE SHE WAS PREGNANT, tried to file court papers against her BEFORE THE CHILDREN WERE EVEN BORN, implied paternity fraud against her and now has finally managed to beat her down legally (using parental alienation syndrome which has been discredited numerous times) and finally took custody of these children away from her.

Now, can we say ‘abuse through use of the legal system here”…the stress this mother and children have been under since BEFORE BIRTH must be unbelievable…and this reversal of custody came about because 15 visitations over a 4 year period were cancelled AND THE VISITATION SCHEDULED WAS THREE DAYS A WEEK FOR 52 WEEKS A YEAR. I mean what is that like 4 DAYS a year cancelled out of OVER 150 POSSIBLE VISITS ANNUALLY? Actually, you can see by reading between the lines of this article the outline of a man being given all the little 'tips' so that he could most appropriately 'work the system'...

Out freakin’ragous.

As I have said before and I will again: when women in our role as mothers finally get control of this situation and I believe we will, it’s just a question of time, one of our FIRST priorities must be a clean sweep of all the gender-neutralized feminists from the halls of ALL the institutions of western justice as they have aided and abetted men in their latest series of atrocities commited against women and children.

Many of these gender-neutralized feminists have springboarded themselves into their cushy positions and high-paying jobs through playing the ‘womens advocates’ card and then gone gender-neutral on us as soon as they attained their career goals.

Thus, a new broom and a clean sweep will be necessary.

Precedent-setting case took twin boys from mom's custody
By Barbara Brown

The Hamilton Spectator
(Jun 17, 2006)

Tomorrow, the Hamilton man and his sons will spend Father's Day splashing and sliding gleefully at a water park in Niagara Falls.

The weekend is booked with plans to attend a family birthday party and to hang out and just have fun. It will be their first Father's Day since the dad was granted sole custody of then five-year-old twins in a precedent-setting decision in Superior Court's family division.

In late April, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the custody order issued on Aug. 29, 2005, by Justice Cheryl Lafreniere. The trial judge took custody from a Jarvis woman whom she found had engaged in a subtle and sustained campaign to alienate the boys from their biological father.

Ontario's top court recognized that removing custody from an "otherwise good parent" was a dramatic remedy, but stated the judgment was supported by evidence of the mother's "persistent, ingrained and deep-rooted inability to support the children's relationship with the father."

The parental-alienation case made headlines across the country and lit up telephones on radio and TV talk shows. It's believed to be a leading case in Canada on one of the most highly divisive and politicized issues in family law. The mother maintains the boys remain deeply insecure and upset 10 months after the court ordered them to leave her home and live with their father.

"The other day, on Tuesday, (one of the boys) was crying and saying, 'Don't give up mommy. Don't, don't give up mommy,'" she said, imitating the young child's plaintive cry.

Lafreniere observed that the mother seemed unable to comprehend that she, by her behaviour, might well be causing her children's reaction.

The mother rejected that notion in a recent interview.

"These children have their own minds and they know where they want to be. It has nothing to do with me. It has everything to do with what they've known, what they've grown up with and what's familiar to them," she said.

The mother corrected misinformation previously reported in The Spectator that she cancelled access to the father 95 per cent of the time. His access was cancelled no more than 15 times in four years, she said.

Lafreniere, a former family lawyer who was appointed to the bench in 2004, carefully structured the custody and access order so the children's transition from their primary residence with the mother to their father's home would be gradual and cause as little disruption to them as possible.

The judge gave generous access to the mom, who has her sons two evenings a week and three out of four weekends a month. The rest of the time, they live with their dad.

The father acknowledges that on occasion one of the boys will be a little sad when the mom drops them off, but within 30 seconds he and his brother are involved in some activity and everything is fine again.

"When the boys are with me, they're happy. They're living for the moment and no, they're not devastated. I do everything I can to make sure they're secure and happy," he said.

The father is an avid photographer and enjoys documenting the lives of his children. The pictures show two active boys with the kind of close bond only twins can understand and who share a curiosity about the world around them.

"When they were younger, I used to stop at construction sites and watch the heavy machinery in action. It (was) amazing how they could name the equipment and would even correct me if I called something by the wrong name," said the dad.

"I am sure mom does a ton of stuff with them that I could not do or would not be too interested in doing with them. I appreciate that she would have different interests than mine and I like the fact they're being exposed to what we both have to offer them."

The mechanical engineer and his ex-wife, a primary school teacher, began to live together in May 1998 and were married that December. The union was short-lived, however, and they separated the following October when the wife was pregnant.

The husband demanded a paternity test, which became a source of burning resentment for his estranged wife.

The man hired a lawyer three months before the boys were born, but was not able to see his children until they were 81/2 months old.

The babies lived with the mother from their birth. The father was initially permitted to visit his children one hour a day three times a week, but he sought greater access through the courts as the boys got older.

His lawyer, Mari-Anne Saunders, a former social worker, gave the dad some excellent advice and he began to volunteer in children's kindergarten class and joined their school's parent-teacher association.

Meanwhile, he took advantage of all the courses he could find to improve his parenting skills. Dad learned very quickly how to manage car seats, double strollers, bottles, diaper bags, along with nap and feeding regimens.

His first glimpse of his sons had been a photograph taken by a lab technician who conducted the DNA tests. The lab called at 10 a.m. to say the tests were done. Dad was there by noon to see pictures of the babies, then just a few months old.

Dr. Richard Gardner, a psychiatrist, first coined the term "parental alienation syndrome" in 1985 to describe the troubling behaviour of children who reject the access parent on the basis of brainwashing or indoctrination by the custodial parent.

Gary Direnfeld, a child behaviour expert, said the syndrome must be differentiated from "parental alienation," which refers to the conduct of a parent who is attempting to sabotage the child's relationship with the other parent.

The Hamilton social worker stressed that parental alienation is entirely unrelated to gender. He said fathers and mothers are equally capable of such "short-sighted" behaviour.

"Originally, it was used as a defence by men whose wives were trying to withhold custody or access of the children.

"And hence, women's groups picked up on it and said it's just another way of blaming the mother when, in fact, these fathers have been bad and that's the basis for these kids not wanting to see them."

But as more divorced fathers sought joint custody and greater access to their children, social workers doing family assessments for the courts began to see alienating behaviour on the part of both mothers and fathers, said Direnfeld.

Mary-Jo Land, who initially had been hired by the mother to do an assessment, testified she had serious concerns about the mother's negative view of the father and the inability of the parents to communicate in a civil or friendly fashion should they bump into each other at their sons' soccer game.

"That kind of negative behaviour creates for the children a feeling of divided loyalties. It creates for them confusion and ambivalence. They love their mother and, therefore, they love the people their mother loves. So what do they do when ... their mother hates their father?" Land asked in testimony.

The child psychotherapist's first report was comprehensive and involved 20 hours of interviews and watching the children in the company of each parent. Land recommended the mom should continue to be the custodial parent, but she warned that if her alienating conduct continued, the mother's custody should be reviewed.

The mother, who had found Land in the Yellow Pages, rejected both her report and her qualifications and refused to co-operate further with the assessor. The mom also has complaints about the competency of the lawyer who represented her at the trial. She has written a letter outlining her complaints to the Law Society of Upper Canada.

Land did not have an opportunity to observe the mother with the children for her updated assessment report.

That second report recommended custody of the boys go to the father.

"What I want out of all of this," said the dad, "is two 23-year-old boys who are happy, well adjusted and respectable."

Monday, June 26, 2006

Role of Attorney, GAL and Evaluator in First Mack Custody Case Must be Investigated

Many, many, many unanswered questions remain about this first custody case of Darren Mack; which in my opinion set the stage for him to act out in the second one. The biggest one beginning how did this guy manage to get custody the first time???? Who gave this guy an evaluation? Who was the childrens’ assigned GAL. Who was the childrens’ mother’s first attorney? Who was the Judge who ruled in the first custody case and what did he base his decision on?

In essence how did this dangerous freak of nature Darren Mack convince so many professionals that he should be the custodial parent of two innocent kids?

This attorney Dahlia Lithwick needs to have her role in this first case investigated as well. As we need to know what role did she play in selecting the GAL or the Evaluator?

Since the bottom line is that this man did not flip out overnight, he’s been sick for a long, long, long, long, long time. He killed one person (that we know of, let’s me clear about that). He tried to kill a Judge and now we hear there was material to make bombs found in his house????

In spite of the spin of this story, it was not the Judge or the system or biased against poor fathers that caused this man to flip out. He’s been ill for a long time and yet none of the professionals in his first custody case caught onto any of this?

It’s pretty odd actually.

We might need to check into other cases that this attorney and Evaluator worked on together and ensure that there aren’t other nuts out there with custody of kids.

Additionally in my opinion, the children are not safe with any member of Mack’s family as they clearly enabled this guy for many years in his delusions, still covering up for him even AFTER this happened and continuing to try to blame the Judge for this. The children should be immediately turned over to their mother or her side of the family. Contact should even be supervised with Mack’s family, as I wouldn’t put it pass one of them to pull some delusional final act of spite against these kids in an attempt to destroy Mack’s first wife and/or members of the family of Mack’s second wife.

Anything is possible.

This is taking on all the earmarks of the Jerica Rhodes case. Hopefully however we are going to have some more answers at the end of it, then we did at the end of that one. Where to this day we STILL do not know the how or the why of Christopher Rhodes getting custody of that poor kid to begin with…

So we’ll see where this one ends up.


The Fall of The Father Of the Year
By Dahlia Lithwick

Sunday, June 18, 2006; Page B02

This past Monday, a wealthy pawnshop owner in Reno, Nev., allegedly stabbed his estranged wife to death. He is also the prime suspect in the shooting that day of the family court judge overseeing their divorce. Judge Chuck Weller survived. The wife, Charla Mack, was found " lying face down in a large puddle of blood in the garage." The alleged killer is the target of a national manhunt. The couple's 7-year-old daughter is safe with family,as are the two children from the suspect's previous marriage. The alleged perpetrator was, it is believed, upset over an interim settlement in his divorce litigation.

This is the kind of story for which the CNN news crawl was invented. It's also the kind of story I'd normally cover as a legal journalist. It offers almost too many angles: the custody angle, the violence-against-judges angle; the salacious- swingers -lifestyle angle.

But the man the police are looking for is Darren Mack. And he is my former client.

I billed hundreds of hours on the Mack case many years ago, when I was clerking for a small family law firm in Reno and he was fighting his first wife for custody of their children. Darren and Charla logged countless hours with us at our conference table, drafting pleadings and preparing for depositions; after court hearings, we would unwind at some nice casino restaurant. Darren was somehow always at the other side of my desk, or on the other end of the phone line, urging me to think about why his kids needed him, and why he alone was their ally. The firm was not involved in this second divorce and custody fight.

You may think this random connection would give me some insight, some ability to say, "He seemed like the nicest guy," or "I suspected something like this would happen." But neither statement is true.

(Sure, but what about the court ordered Evaluation???? Shouldn’t that have given someone some insight into this nut) I mean what’s the good of them if any freak can pass with flying colors. Why not just let the Judge use a Ouija board instead??? It can just spell out the name of the parent who should be awarded custody. It’s cheaper too.) I wish I could say this gives me a new window into the perils of family court, or the special laws of physics that apply to a disintegrating family. But all I can say is that someone allegedly snapped, and I happen to have known him a little.

The instant media diagnosis is that the judge in this case had antagonized not only Darren Mack but loads of other parents and that he somehow had it coming to him.

(Of course she doesn’t believe this she claims, but then why the heck bring it up?) But the judge doesn't have to be an ogre to make someone suffer in family court. I don't know what drives a person to snap, but I do know this about family law: If you strongly self-identify as a parent, and Darren Mack did, then it can be uniquely brutalizing.

(On my heart breaks for this guy, he strongly self-identified as a parent that’s why he did this. Talk about making excuses for a murderer…)

Mack prided himself on being a great father, one of those guys who never missed a T-ball game. For a while in 1998, there was a billboard in Reno that announced: "The Mack Family Presents: Darren Mack. 1998 Father/Husband of the Year. A unanimous decision by his wife, Charla, and his three wonderful children." In hindsight that isn't just tragic. It's almost a warning.

I'm not attempting to justify Darren Mack.

(Like heck you’re not.)

I have no idea what he has done or why. Nor is this an effort to eulogize Charla. I can't quite believe she is dead.

But I suspect that men whose public lives are defined by fatherhood are going to be disappointed by the court system, though they don't always see it that way. They put themselves in the hands of the system to rescue this part of their identity.

(Of course, not a word about the two mothers those lives she helped Darren Mack destroy.)

Their marriage is over but they're still sure they can be Father of the Year.

(Right just what this country needs. More Fathers of the Year like this nut Darren Mack. This woman is unbelievable.)

In fact, they'll be better than that. They'll save the kids from the pain of the breakup with their love.

But the system is crafted to make you share that parenting trophy -- sometimes while still carrying the full financial load. And suddenly, without warning, you're Father of the Alternating Weekend.

The lawyers I worked for did everything in their power to help clients maintain perspective and foster sanity. But if you are the sort of person who desperately wants to use the courts to crush your opponent, you don't always hear that.
Divorce courts tend to leave that desire to crush unresolved. Family court judges have no interest in crushing anyone, so there are few epic victories in family court. The judges and the lawyers and the court-appointed special advocates and the forensic accountants and the therapists all work hard

(Sure they do…so how do you explain how this freak slipped through their professional cordon and managed to get custody of those kids in the first divorce?)to more or less split the baby.

And in the best cases, the parents are wildly frustrated but the kids are stable.

Maybe a system that looks adversarial isn't the best way to foster that compromise. Courts create the illusion that at the end of the day there will be a winner. Yet, in my limited experience, no one has ever "won" their divorce.

If I hadn't known Darren Mack, I'd be rounding toward a tidy conclusion about the increasing lethality of the attacks on the judiciary. But because I did know him, I am left with dozens of much harder questions: What did we miss, if indeed he did what he is suspected of doing? Were we such bad readers of human nature, or was he a perfectly normal client who just snapped? Is there some metric by which one can determine which of the thousands of people you think you know will snap?

Maybe someone like Darren Mack -- who spent much of the past decade in the family court system -- had no business being there. The more you want it and are willing to suffer for it, the greater the chance you'll be disappointed. Or maybe, and this is the worst possibility, while we thought we were helping our clients stabilize their fraught situations, we were somehow becoming their sherpas to madness.

(You mean maybe you are aiding and abetting these freaks??? Well let’s have a full investigation so we can find out how an Evaluator and a GAL BOTH missed what should have been obvious and helped give custody to a serious nut case).

Dahlia Lithwick covers legal affairs for Slate, the online magazine at

Sunday, June 25, 2006

Defacto Parents Should Satisfy Two Criteria

This was a rather interesting little case here in Kentucky.

Actually I rather agreed with the Kentucky interpretation of defacto parenthood as well. In these modern times when many people used hired help to raise their children for them, we really cannot allow someone to claim defacto parenthood based ONLY upon the fact that they babysat a child everyday while the parent was at work.

Nor should we allow someone to claim parental status based ONLY upon financial contributions to the upkeep of the child while they lived with the child’s parent.

A combination of both, however, almost signals abandon by the parent and in those cases (and those cases only) is it proper for a Judge to award defacto parental status to the unrelated person seeking custody or visitation.

So someone was obviously using the old noodle and in Kentucky no less.

Will wonders never cease.

June 20, 2006

Case Law Development: Same Sex Partner Is Not De Facto Custodian By Virtue of Providing Primary Financial Support for Partner's Child

After the breakup of their 8-year relationship, a woman sought custody or visitation of her lesbian partner's daughter, born during the relationship. The Kentucky Supreme Court held that one who is not a parent but who has nevertheless participated substantially in the support and rearing of a child for a significant period of time has no standing to claim a right of custody or visitation upon discontinuance of the cohabitational relationship with the parent unless they can qualify as a de facto custodian of the child under Kentucky statutes. That statute defines "de facto custodian" as "a person who has been shown by clear and convincing evidence to have been the primary caregiver for, and financial supporter of, a child who has resided with the person for a period of . . . one (1) year or more if the child is three (3) years of age." After hearing the evidence, the trial court held that even though petitioner was the primary financial supporter of the child, her partner had been the child's primary caregiver. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed, commenting:

"We are not unaware of the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Washington, Carvin v. Britain, 122 P.3d 161 (Wash. 2005, cert. denied, __ U.S. ___ (2006) where that court took an expansive view of its common law and equitable powers with respect to allowing standing to seek custody in circumstances not dissimilar to those presented here. Notably, however, there was no de facto custodian statute available for the presentation of the applicant's claims. As such, if the applicant was to be heard at all, it was upon non-statutory grounds. In this case, [Kentucky statutes] are controlling. Despite her significant relationship to the child, [petitioner] was not the child's parent and the child was in the custody of her only parent. Thus, [petitioner's] only avenue for obtaining standing to claim custody was to prove that she was a de facto custodian and in this respect, her proof failed."

B.F. v. T.D., 2006 Ky. LEXIS 162 (June 15, 2006) Opinion on the web (last visited June 17, 2006 bgf)

Saturday, June 17, 2006

Doing Good Versus Looking Good

This was an interesting article about the genesis of young girls acting out like brain dead, boy-crazy idiots from about the age of 10 or so (and continuing right through well into their adult years as evidenced by Brittany Spears, Jessica Simpson, ALL of the women on Sex in the City and many others whose names escape me right now).

On how most of the media (as well as many of the adults these young girls come in contact with) instill the insidious idea that the ONLY time girls are doing anything worthwhile is when they are either chasing after a boy or having a boy chase after them.

This starts early as the article notes and has the effect of young girls wasting ALL of the time they should be putting into their education and future career for instance; instead focusing on what they should wear that can attract some boy’s attention to them, how they should ‘play dumb’ as that works to attract boys, when is the right time to lose your virginity and even pitching the outmoded idea that every boy who wants to have sex with a girl is in love with her.

How can you say, “leading to a lot of early sex, disappointment and low self-esteem” in their young lives.

The author was located in Australia but this could be found throughout the western world. Even Disney, which is supposed to be a family entertainment channel has many childrens’ series where the ONLY apparent thing girls focus on in school or home is boys.

How to meet one they like (usually the captain of some sports team), how to dress to be in the right crowd of girls (again, the entire goal being to meet boys). How to get that after school job: again, the central goal usually to raise money for more shopping, of course, the reoccurring theme to get the attention of a boy.

Many of the main story lines focus on parties, who gets invited versus who doesn’t.

Again the whole reason for the party is ALWAYS to meet boys. The most significant thing that ever appears to happen to the girls is not whether or not they get into the school of their choice to get a science scholarship or something that mundane, but who tried out for the cheerleaders squad and either made it or didn’t. But never any discussion about any educational goals or focus on ANYTHING other then how to meet boys.

Well is it any wonder that girls grow up with the idea that the ONLY thing of substance they will EVER accomplish will be meeting Mr. Right with everything else being secondary until Mr. Right comes along. Well, Shades of Sex in the City where even the most professionally successful women is doing nothing (at least in that series) but marking time until they meet the man of their dreams.

Well you want to know where that attitude starts, read below.

Frankly I even find that attitude throughout the blogosphere.

Where most of the womens' blogs (even the supposedly more serious ones) function as little more then places for women to post snarky remarks, along with their picture, the main function obviously being to attract the attention and approval of men.

Meanwhile the mens' site are taking care of serious business.

Someone posted a survey a while back that stated MOST bloggers were blogging in order to meet someone. Or as they delicately put it to get laid.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't think a male blogger or commenter on one of the mens' sites would turn down a decent opportunity to get laid if it was presented by a young woman, but yet I don't see their sites as allowing any untoward focus on women to distract them from their stated mission.

That's why personally I'm in favor of the two-lane highway concept that Congress has been debating for the internet.

This way people who have serious blogs can pay the extra fees and get the public access; while the ones who are using the free blog service as an enhanced dating mechanism can instead join one of those internet dating services.

AND we won't be bogged down with hundreds of women cluttering up the blogosphere when their main purpose is just to meet a guy.

Sorry there are better and more efficient ways to do that.

Why should serious women bloggers lose what is a newly forming and potentially wide reaching forum for us to get our ideas out to the public, so that some of you can keep your dance card filled.

The Age

What is your daughter reading?
August 10, 2004

The emphasis in Australian magazines aimed at teenage girls is on sex, writes Christopher Bantick.

For many parents, seeing their daughter curled up with Dolly or some other teenage magazine seems innocent enough. But perhaps parents should take a look inside these glossies to see what is on offer.

The emphasis in most magazines directed at teenage girls is on sex. Articles in the August editions of the four market leaders - Cosmopolitan, Girlfriend, Dolly and Cleo - advise how to do it, get it and have more of it.

Magazines for girls are aimed at the 12 to 18-year-olds. But the readership is often far younger. Children on the cusp of adolescence regularly read up, not down. Parenting expert Michael Grose has described this shrinking childhood as "adolescent creep".

Dolly declares that its core readership is 16-year-olds; Girlfriend's is 13 to 14-year-olds. Cleo and Cosmopolitan aim for the 16 to 20-year-olds. But the readership of such magazines by those between 10 and 14-years-old is growing - something that the American Psychological Association has warned is dangerous.

In February, the APA attacked American advertisers for pitching to and exploiting the under-14 market, saying these readers "inherently lack the cognitive capability to effectively recognise and defend against commercial persuasion".

A casual thumb through the August editions of Australia's top four girl glossies is revealing.

Girlfriend advises in a response to a correspondent who is asking about a boyfriend insistent on having sex: "I am sure he really does care for you. It's pity you don't believe him coz maybe he really does love you. Negotiating sex is so much easier with your clothes on."

A casual thumb through the August editions of Australia's top four girl glossies is revealing.

Dolly, in a lead story titled "Losing Your Virginity" offers 11 helpful ideas based on real-life accounts. These range from "It's Totally Nerve-Racking" to "It's Messy" and "You Might Bleed".

Both Cleo and Cosmopolitan are in an altogether different league. Both have sealed sections. Cleo this month teases: "Bizarro sex habits that will freak you out"; Cosmo, not to be outdone, offers: "Cosmo's Sex-Fantasy Decoder", where girls can explore their fantasies of being a "Sex Slave" or perhaps a "Naughty Nymph-O".

But besides the heavy emphasis on sex - and problematic sex at that - teenage girls' magazines capitalise on adolescent insecurity. Cosmo offers, "Your Erotic Thoughts Explained" and tips on "Surviving a Sex Drought". Dolly examines, "Bad Boys: Good Fun or Heartbreak?" Girlfriend asks, "Do You Really Want a Boyfriend?" Meanwhile Cleo explores "Ex Sex. Would you? Should you? Will it work?"

Still, as much as girl teenage magazines might be questioned in their emphasis on sex, they may still fulfil a need. In so far as sex education is taught at school, research has shown that this largely fails.

Teenage girl magazines are seen by their market as sources to trust. This is worrying. The information can lead girls to doubt themselves if they are not sexual beings at a young age.

A British study published last month found that teenage girls benefit from being taught about sex and contraception by their peers. The source of the information is largely through magazines. Thirty-five per cent of girls taught by their peers are less likely to have sex before 16, compared with 41 per cent if taught by their teachers.

Another British study, by the girl teenage magazine Sugar and published last month, found that 78 per cent of the 500 13 to 18-year-olds surveyed said that sex tutoring from teen magazines offered "information they were unable to get at school".

Apart from the heavy stress on sex in teenage girl magazines, there is also an unwavering reinforcement that self-esteem and identity is inexorably linked to having a boyfriend.

This dependence on male attitudes to women should be strongly challenged by magazine editors. But instead, they are complicit in presenting girls as dependent on boys for approval and success.

Cleo covergirl Jessica Simpson declares: "I've played dumb all my life. Guys love it." Cosmopolitan, in a section called "Man Manual", tells "What Guys Want in a Girlfriend". What they want includes: "Fill his car with petrol", "Be ready when he rings the bell" and, at the video store, "suggest you rent Bad Boys II instead of Chicago".

The problem with teenage girl magazines is that they give highly suspect information, they create misconceptions about sexuality, they reinforce stereotypes about male and female behavour and they show craven irresponsibility in their disregard for the emotional maturity of their readers.

Do you know what your daughters are reading?

Christopher Bantick is a Melbourne writer.

More Propaganda and Spin--Just in Time for Fathers Day

Dads are the awesome-est
Jun 16, 2006

by Kathleen Parker

We've reached an odd place in Western history when a case has to be made for fatherhood, but here we are.

I'm a shameless "Daddy's girl" even though I'm well past the age of a "girl" and "Daddy" is 10 years in the grave. I'm even past grieving at this point and struggle sometimes to bring his face into focus.

What I have no trouble recalling is the power of his influence in my life and the utter impossibility of imagining a childhood without him. It's not that he was perfect - who is? - but he was mine. And because my mother died young, he was mostly mine for much of my childhood.

This particular happenstance is probably what led me to become a champion of fathers. If my father had died young instead of my mother, maybe I'd be a champion of motherhood, but I doubt it for this simple reason: Motherhood doesn't need a champion.

The sanctity of motherhood is intact and manifest, as irrefutable as the umbilical bond between mother and child. Fatherhood is something less certain. Until the advent of DNA to prove paternity, fatherhood was a bond of faith founded in trust.

She says, "The baby's yours."

He says, "I will be his father."

Unlike women, who know with inescapable certainty that they are the parent of their own child, men have had to place their faith in the integrity of their sexual partner. Thus, fatherhood was a voluntary commitment, a quintessential offering of self-sacrifice and surrender to mother and child.

His selfish interest, of course, was tied to his wish to propagate and protect his own bloodline. Even so, sticking around requires a leap of faith that borders on the mystical.

It's really rather sweet when you think about it - man surrendering his less laudable nature, tamping down his more natural inclination to play Johnny Appleseed in order to mow grass on weekends and patch skinned knees for the added privilege of working hard for little credit.

Fathers, in a word, are awesome.

Things have shifted a bit in recent years, you may have noticed, and "awesome" isn't a word you hear much in describing men, unless you've got some little moon-faced twit gaping at a guy's pecs or the angle of his jeans. More often they're deadbeats, losers, rapists, murderers and abusers. Oh, and idiots. Name a TV dad who can tie his shoes without assistance from his far-smarter wife or kid.

Fathers aren't only morons, they're expendable.

Today's women - armed with degrees and checkbooks, not to mention easy access to sperm banks - enjoy the social freedom to have children with or without dear ol' dad counting contractions and are increasingly opting out of the paperwork. Gone is any shame associated with having children out of wedlock.

For a visual aid, picture Angelina Jolie - goddess/mother toting her collection of global offspring with unwed Brad-Dad in tow, shuffling along like a bashful Sherpa. You get the feeling he's a bit player in the larger narrative, a cameo father with a little "f." How long before mother becomes bored with the father she thus far hasn't bothered to marry?

Obviously, celebrities occupy a demographic all their own, and celebs of Jolie-Pitt status dwell in a niche apart. Who else gets to shut down a country while they give birth? But the broader celebration of these faux-unions and love-babies creates a new storyline that trickles down to the street and gets re-enacted by the un-celebs and lesser actors among us.

Advice to Jolie wannabes: If you're going to have babies outside of marriage, it's best to have a few millions stashed in el banco. Barring that, it's best to have a father who cares that his offspring are more than the result of a random sprint around the fallopian track.

To say that children want, need and deserve to have a father seems as unnecessary as insisting that they want, need and deserve oxygen. How did we arrive at not knowing this?

That some marriages aren't good enough to preserve is understood and regrettable.

But why we would willingly fashion a society in which men are denigrated and fathers minimized like some useless icon is a mystery that escapes me.

The even greater mystery is that men continue to sign up for the job, to sublimate themselves to the higher charge of being a father even in the face of a culture that belittles them. That's what fathers do, of course: take the grief and keep on keeping on.

Which is why we love them.

Kathleen Parker is a popular syndicated columnist and director of the School of Written Expression at the Buckley School of Public Speaking and Persuasion in Camden, South Carolina.

The most interesting thing about the above article is that the author got lucky enough to have custody of her own child as her child’s father is the non-custodial parent. Of course, I assume he pays court-ordered child support and has standard visitation.

YET everytime I read anything this gender neutralized apologist is writing, she has the audacity to be championing for the court to be giving more men custody of OTHER MOTHERS’ kids. All the while lecturing the rest of us (from the comfort of her own safe position) about how fathers are just the ‘awesome-est’. If this author truly felt mothers were in such a strong position that they need no champion, why in the hell didn’t she give her poor child’s father a break from her so-called ‘strong position’ and hand over to him custody of HER BABY. What about that?

Since she feels so strongly about the issue and is such a supporter of fathers.

I guess it’s good enough for the rest of us poor, ignorant, unwashed masses of women to be forced to hand our kids over into all kinds of weird custody arrangements, but SHE exempts herself from doing the same.

Have you noticed how many women like this Parker woman who either have custody of their own kids already or have NO KIDS at all are always telling the rest of us that we should stop what they call ‘maternity gatekeeping” and how the courts are so biased against fathers and more men deserve custody of OTHER MOTHERS KIDS. Not hers, however, that’s different.

As always my question is: who the hell designed these self-righteous, gender neutralized apologists to be authorities on what other mothers should be doing with their kids?

I say shut your big mouths and start leading by example here.

You give your kids up first, okay, and the rest of us will follow.

Lead by example.

The biggest problem for mothers is that we need a champion for mothers equivalent to a maternal Genghis Khan here, instead we keep getting Gunga Din (for those unwashed masses that don’t know anything, Gunga Din was a groveling Indian waterboy assigned to the British army from Kipling’s story of the same name).

I guess every group has had their share of Uncle Toms and Gunga Dins. The problem for mothers however is we have way MORE then our share of these bootlickers, always ready to champion the opposition. No other community has this problem to the same extent that mothers do. Clearly we haven’t been demanding the same level of respect as every other group.

That needs to change.

Sunday, June 11, 2006

State Laws Need to be Changed

Yet another sad case of a rapist getting custody of a child. States should change their laws so this doesn’t happen. Actually I think both parents should have had their rights terminated and the child should have been placed for adoption; yet the laws in most states only allow for automatic termination of the parental rights of convicted first and second-degree rapists (which involves the use of a weapon or some severe level of injury, I believe).

As we see below even a liberal state like New York allows for rapists to petition the court for custody:

“…New York law recognizes certain parental rights for individuals guilty of statutory rape, as opposed to forcible rape, whereas New Mexico does not. In In re Craig "V" v. Mia "W", 500 N.Y.S.2d 568, 569 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986), relied upon by Respondent, the court held that an individual who has fathered a child by virtue of sexual intercourse which was consensual, albeit perpetrated under circumstances constituting statutory rape, is not precluded under New York law from bringing a paternity proceeding.

The New York court based its ruling primarily on the fact that "the legislative proscription against the right to notice in a proceeding affecting an out-of-wedlock child is limited to a father convicted of the crime of rape in the first degree, which involves forcible compulsion." Id. (citations omitted). The court observed that the New York Legislature "specifically declined to extend this limitation to the father of a child who may have been conceived as the result of any lesser degree of rape or sexual misconduct."*

*Information courtesy of FindLaw for Legal Professionals Case No. 95-2053

It appears that since more women are the victims of rape (statutory and otherwise) then men, women were generally more likely to be the victims of these laws. Interestingly enough I never heard of this issue being mentioned before as being such a problem for the nation. I guess as long as women were the only victims, it was considered fine. Another example of a sad oversight in the law, but nothing could be done about it.

Now it’s an issue since a female statutory rapist has gotten custody of the resultant child.


"I know the judge agonized over it but how does a registered sex offender get custody?" said Butch Bradt, Gallardo's attorney."

Well check your state laws Butch. Men convicted of statutory rape in practically every state in the union are eligible for and given custody all the time under the exact same circumstances. It's a pity you didn't think to change that law BEFORE this happened. I guess it wasn't an important enough issue for you then, was it?

Oh well.

So since we’re on the subject, I suggest that we change ALL the state laws so that NO convicted rapist, whether statutory, first, second or whatever degree of rape is committed, is EVER eligible for custody of the resultant child.

Let’s finally bring some common sense and consistency to these situations.

June 7, 2006, 9:03PM

Teacher who had child with teen retains custody


Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle

The mother of a 3-year-old girl fathered with a 13-year-old student will retain custody of the child although the father will get visitation.

After two days of testimony, state District Judge Doug Warne ordered Lisa Zuniga Duran, 30, to continue caring for the child as the primary parent although the girl's father, Andrew Gallardo, 17, of Edmond, Okla., will be allowed to see the child.

Duran was pregnant when she pleaded guilty to aggravated assault of a child in January 2003. She admitted to having a sexual relationship with Gallardo while he was a student and she was a teacher's aide at Victory Academy in Pasadena.

"I know the judge agonized over it but how does a registered sex offender get custody?" said Butch Bradt, Gallardo's attorney. "If she (Duran) were a man, he would not get custody."

Duran has had custody of the child since she gave birth in February 2003. She has since married and has another daughter.

"It's a great decision," Helen Simotas, Duran's attorney said. "It was a struggle, but a struggle that needed to be taken. We have always encouraged Andrew to have a relationship with the child."

Gallardo visited with the child for the first time in two years on Tuesday after Warne orchestrated a reunion.

"His behavior in his role of a father has been immature," Warne said of Gallardo not agreeing to supervised visits. "He is, however, 17. He's the 17-year-old father of a 3-year-old due to the reprehensible conduct of the mother."

The judge's order calls for Gallardo to see his daughter two weekends a month with someone familiar to the child present. Starting in September, the visitation period will be extended with visits unsupervised beginning in November. In June 2007, Gallardo will be able to have his daughter for a week.

Ambriz, the child's paternal grandmother, will be allowed visitation starting in September.

"I'm glad my son has the right to see his daughter but I don't think it's fair that I have to wait to see my granddaughter," she said.

Gallardo, who will turn 18 next month, was ordered to pay Duran $50 a month in child support. He graduated from high school last month, has plans to get a full-time job and attend college to help support his daughter and the son his girlfriend is expecting next month. The judge ordered him to take a parenting class by September.

Duran received deferred adjudication, which requires her to complete 10 years' probation to avoid having a criminal record. Warne ordered her to pay $5,000 to a court-appointed attorney assigned to look after the best interest of the 3-year-old child.

Saturday, June 10, 2006

Sensible Decision for Women Who Wish to be Mothers

Well who didn’t see this one coming.

Men continuing to play stupid and delay marriage long past the time of women’s peak fertility has been leading to drastic drops in the birth rates of most western countries. Of course men still continue to want casual sex, but few marriages result from these liaisons, even if a pregnancy occurs. Many women getting tired of waiting for men to commit just decided they couldn’t wait any longer (our biological time clock is simply not as long lasting as the male one) so they just began going ahead and having babies as single mothers.

AND in spite of the many statistical lies being bandied about these mothers, most of the children raised by them have done quite well.

Of course as many selfish people do when they decide they're not interested in something so no one else should be allowed to do it either, men then decided that even though they had turned their back on marriage and family for the last few decades women shouldn’t do anything successfully without them, so they created all these legal rights for themselves to the children of these never-married mothers. We have seen the results in many long-drawn out custody fights and abductions generated through the selfishness of men trying to give themselves undeserved rights to single mothers’ children.

Thus, this is an excellent idea to cut them off BEFORE they get any legal rights by encouraging women to use anonymous sperm donors. Clearly a nation facing severe declines in its birth rates due to the selfishness of one sex shouldn’t allow itself to fade into extinction when the other sex is perfectly willing to proceed alone. Women still wish to have children and just because men have decided its more fun to play the field until they are in their 50s doesn’t mean women should be excluded from starting the families this small nation NEEDS.

Making this service free to women is even a better idea. As using an anonymous sperm donor is the most simple and least invasive method of having children w/o a partner. You are not only ensuring a constant population rate for what was a small, dying society but you are NOT taking advantage of another human being by using donor sperm, as surrogate motherhood does by risking the physical and emotional health of the surrogate mother.

It’s a variation of the Hippocratic oath: First, do no harm, by doing the LEAST amount of harm.

Men will complain but they’ll get over it, they’ll just have to.

If they wish to change their behavior, fine, women will still be open to marriage with them I’m sure. But at least if they don’t change, women (and their nations) will not have to suffer by doing without children until men decide to finally grow up and act like responsible human beings BEFORE they are 50.,10117,19346798-23109,00.html

Insemination rights for lesbians

From: Reuters

From correspondents in Copenhagen

June 02, 2006

DENMARK'S parliament on Friday passed a controversial law allowing lesbian couples and single women the right to free artificial insemination at public hospitals.

Most members of Denmark's centre-right government opposed the bill, which was proposed by the opposition, but several members of the governing Liberal party defied Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, ensuring its passage.

Mr Rasmussen, who voted against the proposal, supported a competing watered-down version that would have legalised artificial insemination for lesbians and singles at private clinics but made patients responsible for picking up the costs.

"As Prime Minister I have supported the Government's proposal and am therefore disappointed that our bill was not passed," Rasmussen told Danish media.

"But it was important to reach a decision. The issue has been discussed for many years and we wouldn't have gained anything from delaying a vote."

Gay and lesbian groups hailed the outcome of the vote and said adoption rights, still denied same-sex couples in Denmark, were next on their political agenda.

"It is a great victory," Mikael Boe Larsen, chairman of the Danish National Association for Gays and Lesbians said.

"After nine years of struggle people are almost euphoric, people are crying, and especially the lesbians are extremely happy since it is a governmental approval of their family form," he said.

Members of the Conservative junior coalition party and the government's political ally, the anti-immigrant Danish People's Party, deplored the outcome, saying every child has the right to a father. [Yeah right, tell that to the children who are never going to be born, as you slip away into extinction waiting for these fathers to commit. Morons…]

In 1989, Denmark passed a law allowing homosexuals to enter a registered partnership, giving them the same housing, pension and immigration rights as married, heterosexual couples. The country has about 3,000 registered same-sex couples.