Ask Dr. Helen
My PJM column is up:
I think the interview with Mr. Sacks is an important one--go read the column and see if you agree.
Men are becoming increasingly concerned about finding justice in today’s legal system. PJM advice columnist Dr. Helen interviews Glenn Sacks and warns against “standing idly by while your rights are infringed, your freedoms are in question and your sex is used as a weapon against you.”
I think the interview with Mr. Sacks is an important one--go read the column and see if you agree.
posted by Helen at 5:31 AM
45 Comments:
Helen,
I'm just curious.. why are you one of the very, very few (rare) women who actually seem to care about men's rights being stripped away daily? If you go to iVillage, one would think men don't even exist. Why is it impossible to discuss only THE very most important issues with 95% of the women in the U.S.? Marriage and children- what are more important as topics of discussion, yet men and women today cannot even have a casual discussion about either without it exploding in your face? It's also quite clear that most women do not respect men in general anymore. I'm not going to respect anyone who does not have respect for me.
The only part I still don't get is this: are most women truly that insanely stupid about the most important issues or are they pretending to be stupid? And I am asking you this question sincerely-I really need to know.
Reality2007: Ivillage has no less that 30 message boards devoted to the discussion or relationships. There are countless posts and links to that site that discussion marriage and children. Having read 1000s of posts on the boards over there I have never seen anyone suggest men aren't invited to participate. Ivillage is a website that is geared for women, is it expected to have a men's section?
I also think your comment about marriage and children being THE most important subject is a bit biased. Not everyone may believe this.
reality2007,
I don't really think I am that rare-Christina Hoff Sommers, the women at the Independent Women's Forum (oops, I see Cham beat me to it) and others like Jan Brown who runs a men and women's hotline also advocate for men's rights. I think money is also a factor; women's rights has cash behind it--the money pumped in from the VAWA, all the cash for breast cancer from donors and others concerned about women's breast health (notice lung and other cancers are not all that important).
Anyway, do not be discouraged and do not view all women as suspect. I imagine the pendulum will swing back the other way, in favor of equality, but not if some of us don't speak out, lobby and become active to see that equality, not female supremacy (gag) becomes the goal.
Reality 2007
Oops, misread Cham's comment above--so ignore my parenthesis. Take a look at the Independent Women's forum at:
http://www.iwf.org/about_iwf/default.asp
There are some very good articles and topics on personal responsibility etc.
cham,
I was asking Helen, that is why my question was addressed to Helen. You have, ironically though, illustrated my point. You actually believe that a full blown fluff site like iVillage has anything of any substance to offer anyone, much less men? The 'discussions'on iVillage about relationships are all pure cutesy-cutesy garbage that have nothing to do with reality- like choosing which colors are best for a freaking bridal shower, meanwhile a woman can murder her husband and get away with it, or men are committing suicide when they are shocked by the way they are treated in divorce court, or going to jail for nothing or false accusations, and women are becoming so butch now that men would have to be gay to be attracted to them. If you've got something more important than all of that, let me know.
Helen,
Yes, I've seen the IWF and I am aware of the handful of other women who are as enlightened and have basic common sense like yourself, but why did you side-step the question? Are all of the other 95% of U.S. women really so stupid or are they simply pretending to be stupid? I really, really want to know- I'm not being sarcastic- it is a serious question.
reality2007,
I don't think stupidity enters into it--many women look after their own interests and feminine interests--it's their right to do so.
'Looking after their own interests' is about as far removed from what I am talking about as it could possibly be. I have had 'discussions' with hundreds of women on message boards and 95% are always the same. A recent example is a college educated woman actually stated that women are given light sentences for crimes they commit because 'they are better at getting away crime.' That is not 'looking out for her best interest,' that is called 'mind-bogglingly stupid.' I could give hundreds of examples just like this one. Statements so idiotic that would make Bush blush. I guess stupidity is a right, but it's dangerous.
Why do you keep avoiding the auestion?
That was v pleasant to read, Dr H. And, yeah, I think you're spot-on about it's necessary to DO something substantial.
I was recently in touch with the office of my member of congress about starting a DoJ investigation into Mike Nifong.
Reality2007,
This seems to be your MO--telling others that they are avoiding your questions just because you do not like the answer or are just here to stir up an argument. I will let it go but I suspect that no answer I give you will be "good enough" in your book.
Yamantaka,
That's great that you took action to contact your member of congress--if more of us would do that --then perhaps when some of these statist laws or unfair situations come up, they can be shot down instead of flourishing because no one cares enough to speak up.
The issue of how men are treated in divorce is a going to be a major political winner for whoever can put together a good bill to go with the argument. VAWA and other bills were passed by men who have mothers, sisters, wives, and daughters. For every man abused by an unfair judiciary, there is a mother, sister, and girlfriend/wife who sees the system for what it is.
Preach it reality2007.
1. Yes, Helen is totally unique. She should be cloned. Or at least every man should have a Dr Helen doll for positive male -affirming statements.
Like " I am Male. I am good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me ".
The gal that runs Advice Goddess is good but her posters aren't. . Helen is unique-- I have no idea why she is so great but she is. "ifeminist" is also a good site.
2. No-- reality 2007-- you are right-- you just shrink from the conclusion that most women are clueless, total inanities, are hopelessly anti-male and think only of women and their needs , to hell with men. Most women are quite dumb. I tried discussing issues on the Internet , too. The men are rational and empirical. The women's comments 90 % of the time are-- anti-male, totally female-centered, and just stupid-- illogical, ininformed, even crazy. Its a waste of time to debate them.
You shrink from this conclusion because it seems the essence of "sexism" and its really discouraging. Just keep gathering data. "sexism" is not a negaitve generalization-- it is an ill-informed one, based on prejudice, or too hastily drawn, etc Just keep collecting data. And read what men have said about women over the centuries
3. Women don't care about men or any rights we should have or any harm that comes to us-- they use the McKinnon Test-- "is it good for women" and thats all they care about. Its pathetic and juvenile-- thats why women were not allowed to vote or sit on juries. They are dangerous because they are irratinal, ungoverned by moral rules and totally devoted to "us girls". They don't care about men or boys -- watch what they do, not what they say.
They may have a 'right" to pursue their self-interests as women-- but not when it harms or invades the rights of men. But they do it all the time.
They are incapable of empathy with men.
4. Women cannot discuss most issues becasue they have much less knowledge available to them than men. Gottfried ( Linda) who does great , very accessible work in IQ ( if you ever want to learn about IQ, start with her ) has shown that men have more knowledge in virtually every category of cultural knowledge. Women don't have anything inteligent to say , partly because they don't know much and mainly because they don't know how to reason or think in a neutral,objective fashion. Its women, women women, all the time with them. Us girls.Vaginocentric.
5. That so many womnen don't respect men is apparently true-- and its hilarious. Women have done nothing and men have created civilization-- and they don't respect us. Hilarious. On what possible basis could women claim superiority-- except narcissism, self-indulgence, self-centeredness and arrogance. They sure can't reason or understand morality.
5. Begging the question-- Why do "women's issues " have money behind them. Why do women get pork ? Why does breast cancer get 5 times the funding or prostate cancer, which had 40,000 more cases last year-- women don't care unless its female. They are incapable of the magnanmity that comes natural to men.
Why all the federal agencies and research on women's health-- when men suffer more mortality form every major casue of death and die 5 + years earlier. Women don't care. You could go on forever.
Where does all the money come from-- politicians pandering for the woman's vote. Ann Coulter, that goddess, has long held women should not be allowed to vote and states that again in her new book-- "Why I like Hot Mississippi Boys ".
Women are an interest group , who vote their concerns and don't give a damn about men's and are quite willing to destroy men's rights, or inflict any harm , if they think it serves women's intersts. Hence they vote for the DEMS-- a coalition of interst groups-- as the DEms cater to their female- only idelogy to get their votes.
When women found they could vote money out of the treasure for women-- katy bar the door. A Vagina will soon replace the eagle as the national symbol. Or at least our coins will have a new look soon....
Politicians cannot be seen as offending the women-- because some nexus of harridans, fresh from the coven meeting will show up, their fellow travelers in the media will be outraged at the violation of liberal feminist idelogy etc
6. What "pendulum"? passively "swing back to 'equality" . Women will never allow that to happen-- they will continue to degrade men, violate our rights, define our rights way, murder us in our beds, etc ad nausem.
Reality2007-- your observations are empirically based and dead on. Its much worse than you realize. Just keep engaging women-- all their narcissism, ignorance, i irrationality, inability to understand much less apply moral principles. but you know that-- you have tried to have reasoned discussions with them-- and realize - with 90% of women, it isn't possible.
Things will only change if men stop putting up with women's behavior. It hasn't happened since women attacked men-- without provocation -- around 1960 and have conducted a war based on hate against us for 45 + years. There is no "war" between the sexes. Women declared war on men-- white women on white men that is.-- and we have not fired a shot in return.
I don't think men ever will-- when you have something like the moral holocaust of the Bobbitt political trial-- where women applaud and enjoy the mutiliation and degradation of men qua men-- and the Winkler case-- how much further can women go in puking out their bigotry and hate. What can they do next--- watch and see as things get worse.
I never see men organizing for their self-intersts for many reasons...
Women have been let loose on the world. Reading men's comments about women from past centuries-- they were dead on. Women need to be controlled or they will destroy our civilization. Giving them the vote was madness. Letting them serve on juries just assures acquittals for the Bobbitts and Winklers and the gazillion other women who murder and maim men, to female applause and support and love..
Women will never give up what they have gained-- combining appeals to equality when it serves their self-interests and then demanding special priveleges when that serve their self intersts. And screwing men all the way-- giving us the worst of both worlds. Women pursuing their self-interest-- thats immoral when it harms the legitimate rights of men.
REALITY2007-- you may not agree with my screed-- but you are just drawing rational conclusions from your experience. You just hope the sample is limited or that there is something wrong with your reasoning. Neither is the case.If you want to engage in intelligent conversation about significant issues-- you have to talk with other men. Unfortunately since some of those issues involve women-- and you have to get their views , you will have to get down in the mud with them-- and just shake your head at what they utter.
"Sexism"-- is irrational prejudice, unfounded generalizations.
Men are great. God i am glad I am a man.
Memphis should be given to Mississippi. It would raise the IQ OF BOTH STATES.
Elwood P Suggins
Willard Cespar
Bernie Tidbits etahasgard1986@aol.com
Meridian. MS
Reality 2007-- e-mail if you wish. I answered your question..
Join my organization-- S.P.E.R.M.-- the Society for Preserving Equal Rights for Men...
Matthew -- sorry . Women don't care. Fathers rights, divorce, blatant discrimination against men, restraining orders , all of it, the endless list of discrimination against men-- women don't care about men , their rights, much less their needs.
Watch what women do. Gather data. Read what they write. read them on blogs. Read their vile books and articles - "Are men Necessary" etc ... Watch them on TV,watch them block any sane idea-- like punishing women who lie about rape-- go to UTUBE and see so very many videos with women singing songs or degrading men because of penis size. Any such videos in reverse. Nope. Just women being themselves-- abusive , degrading etc-- becaause women think its ok to do whatever they want to men.. like the web site run by woman who advertised a large plastic doll in the shape of a man that women could buy and assault. putting the picture of their boyfrined or husband in his face and of course targets on all the vital zones, and womnes' favorite spot, the groin. Pretty damn sick. Meet your average woman. Think they could have had a female doll for men to attack, or a Jew doll or a N***** Doll... No-- but men are the only group who can be viciously dehumanized and its -- funny. Welcome to the world of women. Just gather data.
Go to feminist sites SEE fEMINISTING. Read in utter disbelief at the hate directed at your gender. Talk to normal women who enjoy threatening you with genital mutiliation and form fan groups for the latest women who murders her husband in the most brutal way )( pamela Smart has a fan Club-- !)
No matthew-- it will never happen. Father's rights will never get any leverage. Nor will men's rights in divorce. Women care only about themselves. They don't care if the rules are unfair and harm men or discrimate against men. They want what they want-- no matter what. They don't care about fairness, justice, equality, morality,
isn' that the lesson of the last 45 years as women have goose-stepped through our society-- massively harming men and their staus and rights and ignoring their needs, muchless their intersts.
If a man has rights that means a woman cannot do whatever she wants-- see abortion. Hence women want to do whatever they want and will stop any attempt to give men rights-- becasue it would limit them doing whatever they want.
Women as a special interst group have inflicted massive damge on "our" society-- to turn it into a female- only society. They will continue to-- unless someone stops them-- probably by force of arms.
Ah The Revenge of the White male-- how sweet it would be-- if only i can live long enough to see men finally breakdown from the hate and abuse and rape of them by women and exact vengeance !! We won't have to wait until they are asleep !
Barf.
To etahasgard1986:
Shees, I thought I had a low opinion of women!!!
Fortunately, Helen isn't totally unique. However, the two people/websites that you cite are pretty nasty. Based on my personal experience (at the e-mail level) with The Advice Goddess, she is an obnoxious bitch when you disagree with her. She doesn't call herself a goddess for nothing! As for Ifeminists, I was long ago cast out from the presence of The Queen (i.e., banned) for not agreeing with her. (Does she still maintain that invitation-only inner sanctum, restricted to people that she finds sufficiently enjoyable?) Her principal problem seems to be that she insists on men taking the time to get to know each woman individually, completely ignoring that the discovery process entails cost and risk on the part of the man. It is just another example of a woman thinking that she should be allowed to dicate what male behavior is "correct". And oh yes, there was the article she wrote saying that women but not men should have "reproductive choice".
I'm convinced that women, much more than men, work hard to maintain a social reputation as wonderfully caring and giving people, even when they are behaving visciously to others. Consequently, many of them come up with incredibly elaborate but completely bogus excuses for their behaviors. I have gotten to the point of just laughing at them, which usually gets me called a "jerk".
Men seem more able to accept the notion that other people are going to have different agendas and that, often, there isn't any good way of reconciling their's with ours. In that case, depending on the cost-benefit profile of the relationship, it may be better for the different parties to simply not have any relationship at all. This gives men the reputation for being "unwilling to commit". The other think that most women don't realize is that, very often, very little time is needed to state the opposing positions and that further "negotiations" may just be a form of slow torture. (Or maybe I just have no tolerance for this sort of thing.)
As for women being stupider than men, I think that you're confusing wanting to be thought of as a nice person (i.e., women more than men) with wanting to be thought of as a competent person (i.e., men more than women). It's possible to be a really nice idiot, just ask anybody who deals with lots of Down's Syndrome sufferers. It is also possible to be a highly competent monster. History is full of people who fit that description. Some of them are even women.
There's a big difference between wacko feminists and the average woman. Sacks' and Helen's point is that men are saying/doing nothing against the drumbeat of feminists who trash men. Every segment I see on TV about domestic abuse and similar topics like this always feature two women, one of whom is anti-male and the other is "moderate". The men's side is seldom presented.
The truth is very powerful. I'm sure things could turn around quickly if Helen was on Oprah.
Mathhew,
"I'm sure things could turn around quickly if Helen was on Oprah."
Really, how would that change anything? And fat chance of that!
"Women cannot discuss most issues becasue they have much less knowledge available to them than men. Gottfried ( Linda) who does great , very accessible work in IQ ( if you ever want to learn about IQ, start with her ) has shown that men have more knowledge in virtually every category of cultural knowledge. Women don't have anything inteligent to say , partly because they don't know much and mainly because they don't know how to reason or think in a neutral,objective fashion. Its women, women women, all the time with them."
Thanks, etahasgard1986, at least someone on here was considerate to answer the question instead of playing a gay little shell game.
Looking at myself, and then looking at you guys, I think of this...
If we men did not have some strange, uncontrollable biological reason for wanting, needing to be around women (not just sex, come on now), we wouldn't be having these types of conversations, the fuel for the fire would not be there.
Like a moth to a flame is all I can think of. It's a long and tedious process, but you have to pick through the barrel. I'm taking a long vacation from it, but will probably dive right back in some time. Like that moth.
The greatest revenge is in designing automobiles, machinery and equipment that are needed in today's world, of which very few women have interest, and therefore know very little about.
The truth? The need us, can't do without us, and it pisses 'em off.
Consider the source, though. When watching a speech given by a leading feminist, who may or may not be soothing to the eye, wait until the camera turns and pans the audience. Yep, hopeless. Not a chance in hell of ever getting the man of their dreams. A prejudice that will never go away, is the beauty which is in the eye of the beholder - or in the case of the typical feminazi audience case - not.
Oh, and yes, that door swings both ways. But a man without a woman is happier than a woman without a man. And can better meet his own needs un- aided. And, well, that makes them even more angry.
And of course, not ALL women are that way. Just a vocal minority, very vocal - very minority.
Helen,
Hehe. That was a bit of a joke, but with a grain of truth. I think if you were on Oprah discussing the issue, most of the women watching would agree with you, or at least have a lot of doubt about their position. I don't think they're a bunch of manhaters, but rather live in a feminist cocoon unexposed to arguments for equality.
Matthew,
Yeah, many just listen to the mantra without thinking too much about it. Also, having Oprah and others telling them how worthy they are probably feels good too.
Women are doing so well out of our present set up,why the hell would they want to argue about it.Every female who is not on the male side is a feminist by default so why bother.Next thing after imbra takes real effect,pornless internet,prostitution made illegal will be a female sex strike,whats the betting?
etahasgard1986: Where does all the money come from-- politicians pandering for the woman's vote. Ann Coulter, that goddess, has long held women should not be allowed to vote and states that again in her new book-- "Why I like Hot Mississippi Boys"
Is that a chapter from her newest book If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans? I don't think she has a book by the title you mentioned.
Women as a block need to be led, they don't like responsibility. As the feminist "leadership" emerged, women who formerly looked to men for leadership began to follow feminist leaders who told them what they wanted to hear: more stuff for women, more rights for women, more more more for women, and the "Me" generation of women was born. Self-indulgent, self-destructive, narcissistic. And rabidly misandric.
There is a problem with this part:
"So guys, remember that next time you shake your head after hearing about a case of a false accusation, divorced dads who have their kids robbed from them, or a male friend who is hauled off unfairly on domestic violence charges. This is happening because men are letting it. You are standing idly by while your rights are infringed, your freedoms are in question and your sex is used as a weapon against you."
The problem with men is far worse than 'not showing up.' Most men are not even aware of domestic violence laws and how easily they can be falsely accused/ have their house and family stripped of them/ have no rights in the family etc.
Men don't learn all of this until it happens to them directly or someone very close to them. One of the greatest victories of all of the psychotic and hideously evil (let's just go ahead and say virtually Satanic) feminist organizations that are the cancer of our society, is how they have managed to actually suppress this imformation.. the most important information that a man needs to know. The only thing more negative than living in a negative society like ours is living in a negative world with a naively positive attitude. Men are not going to 'show up' to something they are not even aware of.
Another problem is that most men cannot even conceive of the fact that anyone, especially women, are so insanely vicious, cold, claculating, amoral/evil enough to do all these things including the passage of these laws (passed in the dead of night like cockroaches) enabling them.
Education of men about these issues is virtually impossible. The schools are over-run with cockroach femarroids that would never allow young boys to warned and educated about divorce laws, false accusations, etc., to protect themselves. This information is never allowed in the mainstream media either. Even the father's oraganizations are attacked & if you were even to pass out phamplets on your own on a street corner about all of this, you'd probably be arrested for a 'hate crime.' Or if the femarroids don't succeed at that, then they will dig up dirt on you to smear your reputation and divert attention from your message and if they cannot come up with dirt, they'll make something up, all typical sleaze tactics of the cockroaches.
So, according to you, men are stupid, women are stupid, but somehow you have been illuminated, you hold the truth. Got my doubts on that one. Correction, I've read your screeds, I have no doubts you don't hold the truth.
"So, according to you, men are stupid, women are stupid, but somehow you have been illuminated, you hold the truth."
...the truth on this subject, that is correct, along with many others who bother to research and do their homework on any subject. You don't have anything to say on the subject at all, so you just insult me. Don't you have something else better to do?
You don't cite, chum. Until you do, you're just pontificating and asserting. Guess what? Your assertions hold no weight. Helen's do, as we can easily find her work.
Only eta made an attempt with just a name and (interestingly) no link to anything you could read. Permuting the name on Google yielded only one reference graduate work I could find, not IQ oriented and no details. Not horribly, let alone "very" accessable. If you know of some, please cite.
As for insults -- pot, kettle.
"95% of the women" -- pulled from where?
"you're just pontificating and asserting. Guess what? Your assertions hold no weight. Helen's do, as we can easily find her work."
I'm not an author. You are a very, very, very stupid person.
"...and divert attention from your message and if they cannot come up with dirt, they'll make something up, all typical sleaze tactics of the cockroaches."
Congradulations, you are now an official cockroach.
Your being or not being an author is not relevant to your not providing cites. They need not be your work, only reference the "facts" you assert you are privvy to.
"they'll make something up" -- like 95%?
"Your being or not being an author is not relevant to your not providing cites. They need not be your work, only reference the "facts" you assert you are privvy to."
"Your assertions hold no weight. Helen's do, as we can easily find her work."
You compared me to Helen. Helen is an author. I am not an author. I do not have to refer to sources because I am not writing a book or even an article. I am making comments on a blog.
You just learned something today! (For you, I also suggest Sesame Street's series, "One Of These Things Are Not Like The Other." It's on a level that someone like you can even understand.)
reality2007 said...
There is a problem with this part:
"So guys, remember that next time you shake your head after hearing about a case of a false accusation, divorced dads who have their kids robbed from them, or a male friend who is hauled off unfairly on domestic violence charges. This is happening because men are letting it. You are standing idly by while your rights are infringed, your freedoms are in question and your sex is used as a weapon against you."
The problem with men is far worse than 'not showing up.' Most men are not even aware of domestic violence laws and how easily they can be falsely accused/ have their house and family stripped of them/ have no rights in the family etc.
Men don't learn all of this until it happens to them directly or someone very close to them. One of the greatest victories of all of the psychotic and hideously evil (let's just go ahead and say virtually Satanic) feminist organizations that are the cancer of our society, is how they have managed to actually suppress this imformation.. the most important information that a man needs to know. The only thing more negative than living in a negative society like ours is living in a negative world with a naively positive attitude. Men are not going to 'show up' to something they are not even aware of.
Another problem is that most men cannot even conceive of the fact that anyone, especially women, are so insanely vicious, cold, claculating, amoral/evil enough to do all these things including the passage of these laws (passed in the dead of night like cockroaches) enabling them.
Education of men about these issues is virtually impossible. The schools are over-run with cockroach femarroids that would never allow young boys to warned and educated about divorce laws, false accusations, etc., to protect themselves. This information is never allowed in the mainstream media either. Even the father's oraganizations are attacked & if you were even to pass out phamplets on your own on a street corner about all of this, you'd probably be arrested for a 'hate crime.' Or if the femarroids don't succeed at that, then they will dig up dirt on you to smear your reputation and divert attention from your message and if they cannot come up with dirt, they'll make something up, all typical sleaze tactics of the cockroaches.
Who made the remark quoted in the post? It sounds like Dr. Helen warns "...", or did Sacks say it? In any case, thanks for saying "sex" instead of "gender."
r-2007 -- Yep. I learned that you only assert and call names. Whoopie.
Again, even though it is pointless, because you are a complete slobbering idiot, this is the lesson:
"You compared me to Helen. Helen is an author. I am not an author. I do not have to refer to sources because I am not writing a book or even an article. I am making comments on a blog."
You are incapable of learning anything because your I.Q. is obviously room temperature. Go play video games.
r2007 --
No. Let me explain it to you. The fact she is an author only means her credentials and works can be looked up, they in turn providing citation to other works. You, on the other hand are only a moniker. Nothing other than what you spew here -- opinion and assertion -- can be looked up for veracity without your citing it.
Indeed, you don't have to cite. But without doing so, it's just spew. If that's all you wish to do, fine. Just don't whine when the rest of us chuckle at it's obvious inanity.
Wow. What a pissing contest. So far, Olg, you seem to have done nothing but insult r2007, with the sole exception of asking for sitations. But this of course is a blog, and you think he's just venting, that's your call. But in keeping up the argument, you're doing nothing but embarassing yourself.
From my own reading and experience, though, the only thing I can criticize him about is that his delivery is, ummm... strident. Other than that, I think he's spot on.
Let me share a piece of anecdotal evidence: I am one who is concerned about how poorly boys are being treated in public education. Like R2007, I will not cite, except to point you in the direction the Natioanl Assessment of Educational Progress, which has consistently shown that boys lag girls at just about every turn. Anyway, in order to try to do something about it, I circulated a petition to take to the local school board seeking to motivate them to address the problem. They referred me to their Asst Superindentent of Curriculum. When I arrived for our meeting, I found he had invited two women to join us, one in charge of reading programs for middle and high school one for elemtary school. When we were introduced, the one from the middle and high schools said: "Ahhh, you must be from the Taliban." I left quickly and I have set that goal aside for now.
(Rusty)
Sorry, "citations," not "sitations."
Tullimoredu:
I don't get it, the principal invited 2 of the school leaders that you could have impacted to the meeting, that was a good start. One of them throws and insult at you and you leave? This could have been a golden opportunity to be gracious, continue with your meeting, make your point and see whether you were able to make a positive change. Sticks stone bones...
You just proved Mr. Sack's point, you may have showed up but you left way too early in the game.
No, actually cham, I stayed and tried to get something done. What I tried to do was to get them to look at the issue and see what could be done to get boys to read better without spending any real money (like an after-school program similar to the one they run to get girls to do better at math). The meeting lasted about half an hour, and when I saw that I was getting nowhere, I began to close the meeting. In the end, they asked me to "provide more data." Of course, the data that I needed was not being made available. You see, in Zoo Jersey, we have standarized testing at three levels: 4th, 8th and 11th grade. The data is recorded by individual, so they have sex information for each student, along with (obviously) performance. But when they report the data to the public, it's broken down by just about every group you can imagine except one: you guessed it: sex. I requested that the data be divided by sex and of course the answer that I got was (drumroll, please): no. No apologies, no it-might-be-made-available-in-the-spring, just "no, we won't be producing that report."
My youngest (a son) just graduated from high school, so I won't be putting a significant energy into this on my own, though I would be happy to support any other parent who chose to do so.
Parents are divided, and conquered.
It will take lots of research, and many parents, to get together to make change. The key is, by the time any change could be forced via groundswell from the parents' end, their kids are out of school. Truly.
But the teachers remain. The teachers and administrators see it as a series of waves, that pass.
It's like poverty in this country. How will it ever go away when millions in this country are employed because of it? The poor die too, you know. They need to be replaced with fresh meat.
Referring to your column, and the way things are, the only answer is change laws to fairness, and avoid marriage, if male, until or unless it is done.
In my battles, caused by mental illness, and a stack of lies that were obvious to everyone involved, I lost everything I owned, I worked for. She was coached all the way, I was left in the rain. Those who coached her, deserted her when my money ran out. I was paying her lawyer to slit my throat, and my lawyer to stem the bleeding. When I was flat, they both disappeared.
My job required travel of 5 days a week. I was never home, most times not even in the same state, at the times I was accused of what I did not do. Proof via hotel bills, charge card slips, eye witnesses, signing in on visitor log books at customers. No matter.
It quietly reduced in ferocity, and I did get our children. She is unable to be a mother, and I was no longer a money printing machine.
She is sick. Her sickness is evil. Sad, but true. I still can't understand what is with the court system, lawyers, medical and social services. Not to mention the insidious reasoning of those driving it all. Let those types learn the real compromises one makes, all the things it really takes to make it in life under your own steam.
Stay single, boys. Go to Vegas once a month. It's cheaper than a wife anyway.
kiss168下載a視訊聊天室v6 0台灣成人網免費線上歐美av美女美女美女遊戲無碼a片美女寫真xxx383美女寫真日本美女寫真集玩美女人a片網aio交友愛情館tt1069同志交友網情色交友0401成人交友拓網交友pc交友小魔女免費影片sex383線上娛樂場
Post a Comment
<< Home