I had to laugh yesterday seeing all the enablers in the media, women as well as men, bending over backwards to spin this incident favorable to Alex Baldwin, desperately trying to paint this jerk as a loving father. It’s not like Alex Baldwin has never been reported to have any anger management issues before this. It’s one of the reasons Kim Basinger stated for divorcing him in the first place. He’s has a history of bizarre outbursts such as punching walls on sets when the air conditioning isn't working properly, yelling and making verbal threats to reporters, even threatening to leave the US if Bush won the last election. He appears to be a bully in his public life and now we see it’s the same thing in his private life as well.
The damage was done by Baldwin, not the person who released this tape message of him calling his 11 year old daughter a pig and threatening her that he’s going to ‘straighten her out’ when he gets a hold of her on Friday. BTW, Baldwin didn’t even know how old his daughter is, that’s how connected he is to this poor kid.
Trying to paint this Alex Baldwin as the victim here of so-called ‘parental alienation’ is total crap. As even if it’s true, you certainly don’t attack an 11 year old for something that’s totally out of her control. This shows me unresolved anger management issues with Alex Baldwin here, not parental alienation. It’s my opinion that the real victims here are Kim Basinger and Ireland, who have had to tolerate a reign of terror from Alex Baldwin.
The courts have enabled Alex Baldwin to wage a six year custody battle against this mother and child attempting to wear Kim Basinger down by attrition. It’s outrageous that Baldwin has been allowed to do this. If Kim Basinger did release that tape (although it could have even been Ireland herself who managed to do it, she’s certainly old enough) I see it more as a cry for help to the American public. Clearly Basinger didn’t feel that Baldwin's outburst would receive the attention it merited and her daughter might not receive the protection she deserved from the courts. Thus, she took her case to the public and frankly, I’m glad she did. It’s good for us to know what mothers and children have to put up with in the court system today and it's good that the courts know we know...
The short-term damage of this situation is to this mother and daughter. Kim Basinger never had any other kids and probably never will after this experience. Not to mention Ireland, who will probably grow up to be like so many other young women of her class today, using all these odd method of creating a 'safe' family such as artificial insemination and/or running around doing single parent adoptions. Or the safest alternative, adopting a string of cats or dogs and crafting them into a family of sorts. But the long-term damage is to the millions of other young girls and women who see this going on and won’t be having any kids either due to our legal system empowering men to harass a mother and daughter in this fashion. As I've said before it’s one more nail in the coffin of western civilization.
http://www.tmz.com/2007/04/19/alec-baldwins-threatening-message-to-daughter/
Alec Baldwin's Threatening Message to Daughter
Posted Apr 19th 2007 3:03AM by TMZ Staff
Filed under: Celebrity Justice, Alec Baldwin
An enraged Alec Baldwin unleashed a volcanic tirade of threats and insults on his 11-year-old daughter, Ireland, calling her a "thoughtless little pig," and bashing her mother Kim Basinger -- and TMZ has obtained the whole thing unfiltered and raw. And we've learned, a family law judge was so alarmed after hearing the tape, she has temporarily barred Baldwin from having any contact with his child.
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Sunday, April 15, 2007
More Updated Census Figures
I thought this was rather interesting.
Some updated information since the 2000 census, which shows the vast numbers of mothers who have lost custody of their children. Remember each of those percentage points represents hundreds of thousands of children.
Anyway, I suspected for a while now that many fathers rights organizations were putting out lies claiming 85% of mothers had custody of their children, while only 15% of fathers did and using this lie to claim discrimination in family courts against men, when in fact it’s mothers who face actually discrimination in courts. But I had no evidence except the many mothers who email me constantly telling me how they had their children stolen from them, many of these infants btw, many stolen by men to collect financial benefits for themselves; similar to this Kevin Federline character. Who, btw, actually got 17 million from Brittany Spears (not the one million commonly reported in the media). This useless recreational sperm donor, who abandoned two children with another woman before he targeted Spears as a more lucrative mark, has now been awarded custody of the two children so he’ll be ‘juicing’ Spears for many years to come.
I get sick every time I think of this greedy useless sperm donor with those babies.
The actual figures from 2004 (and I believe they are even higher now) are 20% of fathers having custody rising to 30% for higher income men (so this targets lower income women, the most vulnerable mothers and more likely to be stay-at-home moms with few resources available to them). Anyway the 15/85 percent commonly reported in the media is a lie and has been for some time now. Over the last decade, many greedy men have become aware of the financial benefits available by being named the custodial parent of a child and have been entering the family courtrooms across this nation in droves to start working the system.
So mothers, especially younger ones who are likely to be targeted for this sort of scam, must become educated regarding this situation: how their children can be used by those who wish to profit by obtaining custody of them.
http://www.gocrc.com/research/custody-stats.html
Child Custody Statistics 2004
Single Parent Families with Own Children Under 18 Data source: U.S. Census, America’s Families and Living Arrangements 2004 Current Population Survey, March 2005. Table FG-6.Highlights and Notes:
To reflect final custody settlements as accurately as possible, data below include only "never married" and "divorced" families. "Widowed" and "separated" figures are not included.
Census does not maintain a separate category for joint physical custody. Instead, children are counted as living with the parent where they reside most. For example, if a child lives 60% with the mother and 40% with father, the child is counted as living with the mother.
For children who spend equal amounts of time with both parents, the survey counts them as living with the parent where they are found on the day of the survey. Thus half of the children in 50/50 arrangements are recorded as living with their mothers and half as living with their fathers.
For the total population, divorced single parent families headed by fathers exceeded 20%. Father-headed families increase with income, exceeding 30% at several income levels for white and Hispanic families, and at $100,000 and over for black families.
White and Hispanic families have similar levels of mother and father-headed famlies across all income categories, while father custody is rare for black families.
Divorced and never-married families have approximately the same breakdown between mother- and father-headed families.
Joint physical custody levels cannot be determined from the data, because children are counted with the parent they live with most.
For equal custody, in which children spend the same amount of time with father and mother, Census procedures result in children being assigned randomly to either father or mother, so half of 50/50 custody families are counted as headed by fathers and half as headed by mothers. The population of 50/50 custody families can be estimated by the following formula:J = 2(C - F), where J = 50/50 joint custody families; C = percent of families listed by Census as headed by fathers; F = percent of families where children live more than half time with father .The best estimator of Fis the percent of children in sole custody of fathers, because joint physical custody assignments that are not 50/50 usually give the majority of time to mothers.
Father sole custody families historically have been approximately 9% of single parent families, ranging up to 12% in some states. Based on the 9% estimate, the level of 50/50 custody for divorced families is approximately 2(21 - 9) = 24%. If the level of father sole custody families is 12%, then equal joint custody families are approximately 18% of the total. For never married and divorced families combined, the estimate for 50/50 joint physical custody ranges from approximately 11% to 17%.
Some updated information since the 2000 census, which shows the vast numbers of mothers who have lost custody of their children. Remember each of those percentage points represents hundreds of thousands of children.
Anyway, I suspected for a while now that many fathers rights organizations were putting out lies claiming 85% of mothers had custody of their children, while only 15% of fathers did and using this lie to claim discrimination in family courts against men, when in fact it’s mothers who face actually discrimination in courts. But I had no evidence except the many mothers who email me constantly telling me how they had their children stolen from them, many of these infants btw, many stolen by men to collect financial benefits for themselves; similar to this Kevin Federline character. Who, btw, actually got 17 million from Brittany Spears (not the one million commonly reported in the media). This useless recreational sperm donor, who abandoned two children with another woman before he targeted Spears as a more lucrative mark, has now been awarded custody of the two children so he’ll be ‘juicing’ Spears for many years to come.
I get sick every time I think of this greedy useless sperm donor with those babies.
The actual figures from 2004 (and I believe they are even higher now) are 20% of fathers having custody rising to 30% for higher income men (so this targets lower income women, the most vulnerable mothers and more likely to be stay-at-home moms with few resources available to them). Anyway the 15/85 percent commonly reported in the media is a lie and has been for some time now. Over the last decade, many greedy men have become aware of the financial benefits available by being named the custodial parent of a child and have been entering the family courtrooms across this nation in droves to start working the system.
So mothers, especially younger ones who are likely to be targeted for this sort of scam, must become educated regarding this situation: how their children can be used by those who wish to profit by obtaining custody of them.
http://www.gocrc.com/research/custody-stats.html
Child Custody Statistics 2004
Single Parent Families with Own Children Under 18 Data source: U.S. Census, America’s Families and Living Arrangements 2004 Current Population Survey, March 2005. Table FG-6.Highlights and Notes:
To reflect final custody settlements as accurately as possible, data below include only "never married" and "divorced" families. "Widowed" and "separated" figures are not included.
Census does not maintain a separate category for joint physical custody. Instead, children are counted as living with the parent where they reside most. For example, if a child lives 60% with the mother and 40% with father, the child is counted as living with the mother.
For children who spend equal amounts of time with both parents, the survey counts them as living with the parent where they are found on the day of the survey. Thus half of the children in 50/50 arrangements are recorded as living with their mothers and half as living with their fathers.
For the total population, divorced single parent families headed by fathers exceeded 20%. Father-headed families increase with income, exceeding 30% at several income levels for white and Hispanic families, and at $100,000 and over for black families.
White and Hispanic families have similar levels of mother and father-headed famlies across all income categories, while father custody is rare for black families.
Divorced and never-married families have approximately the same breakdown between mother- and father-headed families.
Joint physical custody levels cannot be determined from the data, because children are counted with the parent they live with most.
For equal custody, in which children spend the same amount of time with father and mother, Census procedures result in children being assigned randomly to either father or mother, so half of 50/50 custody families are counted as headed by fathers and half as headed by mothers. The population of 50/50 custody families can be estimated by the following formula:J = 2(C - F), where J = 50/50 joint custody families; C = percent of families listed by Census as headed by fathers; F = percent of families where children live more than half time with father .The best estimator of Fis the percent of children in sole custody of fathers, because joint physical custody assignments that are not 50/50 usually give the majority of time to mothers.
Father sole custody families historically have been approximately 9% of single parent families, ranging up to 12% in some states. Based on the 9% estimate, the level of 50/50 custody for divorced families is approximately 2(21 - 9) = 24%. If the level of father sole custody families is 12%, then equal joint custody families are approximately 18% of the total. For never married and divorced families combined, the estimate for 50/50 joint physical custody ranges from approximately 11% to 17%.
Sunday, April 01, 2007
Women giving Birth could Morph into Paid Vacation for Men
The article below is total propaganda and more of the ongoing attempts by gender-neutralized feminists and fathers rights advocates to usurp the natual rights of mothers. This should serve as the warning shot across the bow alerting mothers to the next attack being mounted against us.
Following the trail laid by US gender neutralized feminists such as Linda Hirshman and Cathy Young, this Equal Opportunity Commission propaganda report is attempting to force mothers to abandon staying at home with their children since too many of us might made that choice. As Simone de Bouvair, gender neutralized feminist extraordinaire observed, women shouldn’t be given the choice to be stay-at-home mothers as too many of us would select it.
I can see going down the road these attempts by men to steal maternity leave from mothers in order to give themselves a nice paid vacation spreading throughout all of the western countries. Not to mention what this will mean for never-married mothers, as I can also see some lazy recreational sperm donor being empowered to go to court in order to fight for custody even before birth. That way he can start his paid vacation as soon as your baby is born.
There is simply no end to the many ways men can find to manipulate our children in order to create benefit for themselves. Make no mistake about it, this will eventually morph into every mother having to mount a court fight with a judge having to decide who gets to take any leave in order to be home with your baby and it's not a given it will be a decision in favor of mother.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2027348,00.html
Baby does best with dad off work, study finds
Lucy Ward, social affairs correspondent
Tuesday March 6, 2007
Children are more likely to suffer development problems if their fathers do not take paternity leave or spend enough time with them when they are very young, according to an analysis of thousands of babies born around the turn of the millennium.
A report published today by the Equal Opportunities Commission and based on research tracking 19,000 children born in 2000 and 2001 found emotional and behavioral problems were more common by the time youngsters reached the age of three if their fathers had not taken time off work when they were born, or had not used flexible working to have a more positive role in their upbringing.
Previous research has highlighted the importance of a mother's involvement when a child is small, but the EOC says this is the first study to confirm that the close involvement of a father also has a significant impact on a child's future.
The analysis finds no evidence that mothers' employment influences the extent of development problems in three-year-old children - in contrast to research published in 2005 by the childcare expert Penelope Leach which suggested young children looked after by their mothers did better than those cared for in nurseries or by relatives.
The government last night pointed to moves including the introduction of paid paternity leave and more than doubling of maternity pay as evidence of commitment to helping families balance work and caring responsibilities.
Following the trail laid by US gender neutralized feminists such as Linda Hirshman and Cathy Young, this Equal Opportunity Commission propaganda report is attempting to force mothers to abandon staying at home with their children since too many of us might made that choice. As Simone de Bouvair, gender neutralized feminist extraordinaire observed, women shouldn’t be given the choice to be stay-at-home mothers as too many of us would select it.
I can see going down the road these attempts by men to steal maternity leave from mothers in order to give themselves a nice paid vacation spreading throughout all of the western countries. Not to mention what this will mean for never-married mothers, as I can also see some lazy recreational sperm donor being empowered to go to court in order to fight for custody even before birth. That way he can start his paid vacation as soon as your baby is born.
There is simply no end to the many ways men can find to manipulate our children in order to create benefit for themselves. Make no mistake about it, this will eventually morph into every mother having to mount a court fight with a judge having to decide who gets to take any leave in order to be home with your baby and it's not a given it will be a decision in favor of mother.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2027348,00.html
Baby does best with dad off work, study finds
Lucy Ward, social affairs correspondent
Tuesday March 6, 2007
Children are more likely to suffer development problems if their fathers do not take paternity leave or spend enough time with them when they are very young, according to an analysis of thousands of babies born around the turn of the millennium.
A report published today by the Equal Opportunities Commission and based on research tracking 19,000 children born in 2000 and 2001 found emotional and behavioral problems were more common by the time youngsters reached the age of three if their fathers had not taken time off work when they were born, or had not used flexible working to have a more positive role in their upbringing.
Previous research has highlighted the importance of a mother's involvement when a child is small, but the EOC says this is the first study to confirm that the close involvement of a father also has a significant impact on a child's future.
The analysis finds no evidence that mothers' employment influences the extent of development problems in three-year-old children - in contrast to research published in 2005 by the childcare expert Penelope Leach which suggested young children looked after by their mothers did better than those cared for in nurseries or by relatives.
The government last night pointed to moves including the introduction of paid paternity leave and more than doubling of maternity pay as evidence of commitment to helping families balance work and caring responsibilities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)