Life Changing Injury

Thursday, July 27, 2006

Choices

James Adams of fathers4equality writes:

Male suicide
Three feminasty myths:

1: Women attempt suicide as often as men, they just use less lethal means.
This is partially true, but more unsuccessful -- if you can call a completed suicide successful. Many male attempts are never reported.
I also dated a girl for a while who did the "I've just attempted suicide and swallowed a packet of Panadol" attention-grabbing device. She knew she wasn't going to die, or even be injured. She ate the pills and rang the hospital.
Needless to say she had done that trick 5 times before, by her own admission. who knows how many times since...

Using the feminasties argument, this single woman is as important at 5 men WHO ARE REALLY ACTUALLY DEAD.

2: Many suicides are reported as accidents.
How many drug OD's (overwhelmingly male) are really suicides?
How many car accidents? Country coppers all know about the fatal "accident", where a sober driver, close to town, runs into a tree on a straight stretch, with no skid marks.
How many accidental shootings?
As a kid in the country I was perplexed by how many farmers had "accidentally shot themselves in the back paddock while climbing through a fence" Years later, I realised these were not accidents.

3: There are real social taboos against suicide. Catholics believe suicide victims die in sin and their remains are not to be buried in a churchyard.
Life insurance policies don't pay-out on suicides. And what country copper, when faced with a grieving family is going to point the finger and say "suicide", it is kinder to say "accident"

At the end of the day, more men suicide than all people killed on the road... It's carnage.
Suicide is seen as the easy way out; the cowards' way out.
Yet there is not a man alive faced with false allegations of abuse and domestic violence that has not considered it.

My ex chose her ground for extortion carefully and well. She knew the depths of my lifelong beliefs against striking a woman even if I were attacked.
My ex and her daughter knew that I would not turn to violence under any circumstances. And she knew the prejudices of Australian society and its legal system. No one would believe that I could endure the abuse for so long and not turn violent.
I prayed for nearly two years to not wake up because of her abuse. Then she lied to the courts and police, and without any evidence, effectively convicted and punished me for the abuse I suffered.

After months of hellish stress, the courts' decisions took me to the edge. I told a psychologist -- by phone, email, and in person -- that I wanted to be committed because I knew I was a danger to myself.
Now that I know the incompetence and neglect in the Australian mental health system, I understand why she wouldn't admit me. At the time, it just felt like I was being tossed away again.

Every man that I've met tells a similar story. I can see in their eyes that all of them would rather be dead than go through more.
In some cases, these men have carried that death wish with them for 8 years or more, and it is still continuing.

What should happen to those who file false allegations of abuse and domestic violence?
Jail.
If they have succeeded in taking property or money as a result of the extortions, the property should be seen as the proceeds of crime. It, along with damages, should be returned to the victim.
They are unfit parents. They should be removed from their children's lives.

That Australia condones and encourages such behaviour by the prejudice of its courts and social system is inhuman, and a breach of commonly held civil rights. The nation should be made responsible in the only way governments understand: financial.
The responsible parties, -- agencies, supervisors, judges, police, even court clerks and 000 operators -- should be removed and forbidden to hold any such jobs again.

1 Comments:

  • REASONS FOR SHARED CUSTODY

    There are some basic principles that are completely missed out by opponents
    of shared custody.

    According to opponents of shared custody

    * the child is best supported and cared for by staying in one home not two.
    Going from home to home is seen as damaging for the child

    * children only need to see the father every few days and can even go 7 days
    or more without damage to the child

    * every child has a primary caregiver, most often the mother, and the
    primary carer is the more important person in the childs' life

    What is not considered are these facts

    1. Children are naturally bonded to both mothers and fathers

    2. Even though a father (or mother) may be at work all day this does not
    mean he is less of a caregiver

    3. Clinical practice indicates that where a parent is missing from a home, a child is at greater risk of
    psychological problems

    4. Children adapt well to going from home to home and the benefits of seeing
    both parents regularly outweights the cons and hassles of living in two
    homes

    5. There is complete bias against fathers. fathers are demonised and
    stereotyped as potentially abusive of children. fathers are seen as less
    important in parenting and making less of a contribution.

    6. The new family law act is not direct enough in producing a shared living
    arrangement. Hence mothers and fathers will fight for custody.

    7 Unless the government regulates and makes law shared living arrangements
    mothers and fathers will continue to control time

    8. Children will continue to get second best by seeing one of their parents on infrequent basis

    Ilan Cohen
    Clinical Psychologist
    Sydney

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:17 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home


Rate me on Eatonweb Portal Blog Directory
bad enh so so good excellent