The Pitfalls of Inviting More Government into Our Lives

QUOTE: "Rob has written a lot about the pitfalls of inviting even more government intrusion into and control of your life."

“Free men” don’t beg for a piece of the pie from “the master.”

Free men bake their own damn pies, and tell everyone else to “fuck off!”

If you think the government will solve your problems with shared parenting, you are begging for your piece.

If you think the government will solve your DV problems with DV Shelters for men, you are begging for your piece.

I prefer to associate with men who don’t realy upon government to solve their problems.

Government is only preferable because it is removed from the imperfections of “mankind” and transformed into some entity nobody really understands, called “government.” It's because government is abstract from most human thinking that people believe they can foist their personal problems off onto some “generic” entity called government which we can imagine in our minds should be perfect. History has shown is this exactly the wrong approach – over and over again! And yet, because government is removed from the “personal” and thus also, “personal responsiblity”, it's easy for us to blame all of our problems upon this impersonal “entity” which does not represent us personally, but is in the abstract, and thus, “perfectable” in our minds.

No wife thinks her husband is perfect. But she thinks the abstract of government, which she doesn’t understand by nature, is somehow “perfect” because it is abstract.

Government “permission” is not the answer.

In fact, it is THE PROBLEM!

---

QUOTE: "I hear you Rob, but how does that pertain to men’s rights? For example, most fathers are awarded custody about 7% of the time. Women obtain custody 93% of the time. And of course there are a whole host of other men’s issues. Do you have any position on these at all? That’s cool if you don’t; I’m just curious."

OK, But I am bit going to write out a big explanation – however, I am going to ask you to answer me.

Almost every shared parenting activist cannot manage to write about their goals without decelaring… “except in cases of Abuse!!!!” Now, if you want to follow that route, and say that women will recieve less custody, and less money from a non-abusive father than from an abusive one (which will be the case), should I believe there will be less or more men falsely accused of abuse, as a result of shared parenting?

Second question,

Do you think those people who advocate for Shared Parenting, despite knowing the increased amount of fathers that will be falsely charged with abuse… should they be let off the hook and be allowed to blame this increase in false abuse cases on the government – or are the Shared Parenting advocates also directly responsible for their actions, and the results?

Is only the government accountable, or also those MRA’s who will be sticking more innocent men into prison for their own personal benefit… and yet, blaming it all on the abstract, impersonal, “government?”

So far, in my time in the MRM, I have not yet ONCE seen a Shared Parenting activist address these issues:

1 – They are increasing the motivation for women to NOT have an amicable divorce. In fact, they are trying to SOCIALLY SANCTION divorce, by coming to a “consensus.” (Rob pukes up a bit of Marxist bile).

2 – They are increasing the motivation for wives to make false accusations of abuse in order to gain money.

3 – They are increasing the motivation for wives to make false accusations of abuse in order to gain sole-custody.

4 - They totally wish to sidestep that shared-parenting will automatically restrict the right to freely move about the country. As in, if you are divorced and in a shared parenting situation, you will have to go to court and beg a judge to allow you to relinquish your shared parenting responsibility (which will eventually become mandatory) should you need to relocate to another city to find employment or whatnot - and so will your ex, and so will the person who remarries your ex. What a great way to bring in "papers please" type of totalitarianism into our society when we travel/move about the land. It's all for the children, after all.

The advocation of this “issue which we can all agree upon” will do enormous damage to “men.” Just not currently divorced fathers, I suppose – who seem quite willing to fuck over the fathers that will come in the years after them, in order that they may get their piece of pie today.

But, some of those fathers that come later will be their sons!

---

QUOTE: "Perhaps, as F. Roger Devlin says, it is time to initiate full custody."

You are certainly right about Devlin – he gets it! Especially when you see him at the end of his “Rotating Polyandry & It’s Enforcers” essay. Of course, “It’s Enforcers” was written by Baskerville – yet another shared parenting advocate, and yet another academic “leader” that is “acceptable.” Devlin notes, at the end, that indeed it appears that a system of sole father custody is most likely what is needed – and I applaud his courage in seeking truth. For, as he notes, as far as Baskerville goes, while he might agree with sole father custody in theory, he doesn’t believe it is acheivable, it is too fringe and therefore some form of shared parenting… yada yada… equality… yada yada… I have no brains… yada yada… because I have a Ph D … yada yada… and I have been brainwashed… yada yada…

Devlin asks a very poignant question after this (paraphrasing): “How ridiculous was it for gay activists 30 years ago to talk of same sex marriage, until today where it is talked of without a smirk on people’s faces? Surely, it is not a stretch for fathers to reinstate that which has always been in the face of what we have today!”

Yet, this is the wimpiness what we hear today.

Devlin makes a point after that, which I also fully agree with, that most of these shared parenting activists seem to miss – the point of activism is to move the fringe. The fringe controls the middle of the road.

Those of you who have been following along with my posts over the past while must know what I think about the “Absolute Truth” and the need to “take a stand.”

This is exactly the same thing, you guys.

Shared parenting is 1 + 1 = 2.3

We all know reality is 1 + 1 = 2

I don’t support living in a world where the math doesn’t work – and shared parenting doesn’t work.

Short term solutions = long term problems.

It is not responsible for parents of today to foist their problems onto kids of tomorrow… the way the parents of my generation dropped the ball and foisted no-fault-divorce the next generations… this is our no-fault-divorce. I just cannot imagine absolutely any benefit that shared parenting will add to humanity in the future.

What the hell are people thinking?

Involving government into the family even more????

Even Baskerville – a man whose fame is made upon being screwed by government doesn’t seem to get it.

Everyone sees the government as some abstract “perfectable entity” rather the faulty individuals in front of them. That’s why they run to them asking for their piece of the pie, along with the other serfs.

I guess the thing what gets me so hopped up about things like Shared Parenting and DV Shelters… or rather “me too Mra-ism” is, this is exactly the reason I have been shrieking about Marxism for years! And while people certainly understand when they see the word Marxism that looks like, and sounds like, that thing called Marxism – not enough of us seem to get it, what it is about, and it is crucial that we do.

Look, this isn’t a fight between men and women so much as it is a fight against our freedom.

Women are simply the best way to start the machine to self-destruct.

But, they only start it!

We finish it!

It will be us who closes the barn door – the backlash consolodates the gains.

They said they wanted to remove children from their parents… obviously, it is easier to remove fathers than mothers… and if you follow the Marxist line further, it should be obvious that upon “the backlash” that the fathers will remove the mothers from their children.

When might this happen?

I don’t know… maybe they will wait until around 50% or more of children aren’t raised in homes with fathers. Whenever that may be.

Feminism is toast… this bus is turning our way. You can tell me if you think it is an accident or not. According to the agenda’s stated goals themselves, it is about time for them to discard feminism and allow a “backlash.”

So far, all I see is “Marxist approved Backlash.”

So far, this hasn’t worked out well for anyone in the world.

But every one of the people who fell for it thought that it would.

And so do we.