Thursday, April 24, 2008

New Reality Show on "Bad Dads"

A number of readers have emailed me about a destructive new reality show being considered for Fox on "deadbeat dads" (thanks very much). Here is a synopsis of the show:

After embracing the dark side of reality television with its marriage-busting hit "The Moment of Truth," Fox's newest project taps the power of its unscripted division for the forces of good.

The network has ordered a pilot from 3Ball Prods. in which an avenger of penniless single mothers hunts down deadbeat dads and forces them to pay child support.

Jim Durham, director of the National Child Support Center, functions as a sort of "Dog the Bounty Hunter" for tracking deadbeats. In the pilot, a financially destitute mom is contrasted with her wealthy ex-husband, who is living the high life. Durham confronts the man at his country club to shake him down in front his friends. It's ambush reality TV -- but for a noble cause.

Most disturbing about this shake down show is the abuse they are heaping on men in the name of "justice":

"(Durham) calls them on the phone and gives them the chance to do the right thing," said executive producer JD Roth ("The Biggest Loser," "Beauty and the Geek"). "Of course, those calls are never met with anything but yelling. Then he goes into their life, finds out what kind of assets they have and makes their lives miserable -- foreclose on their house, repossess their car. He will squeeze them until the women get paid..."

Durham's National Child Support Center is one of several collection agencies that serve as a last resort for neglected single mothers. Some critics say such companies do more harm than good. Child support collectors have been accused of charging steep fees and using ultra-aggressive tactics. Durham bills his clients 34% of whatever he collects.

Roth counters that Durham's clients typically feel so abandoned by the court system that they're relieved to get any money at all. Plus, he said Durham is the only collector who extracts interest owed on the outstanding debt, so his clients often receive more money than if the absent dads had simply paid their bills.

As for the aggressive tactics, child support is not considered a debt per se, but an order of the court. Collectors are therefore not subject to following the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which regulates what tactics a collection agency can employ to collect a debt.

"I'm hoping that eventually this show changes how courts see deadbeat dads and how moms have to deal with it," Roth said.

If greenlighted to series, "Bad Dads" will provide Fox a fresh take on the law enforcement reality show, a genre the network pioneered with such Saturday night staples as "Cops" and "America's Most Wanted."

"I've seen 'Cops,' and I want to watch more than a crack addict with his pants around his ankles running away from a police car," Roth said. "These guys owe money, and they should pay."

From what I can gather, this show is just a pilot right now but could blossom into a series. There must be some way to keep this from happening. This show sounds sick, inhumane and frankly, the way that some men are often treated in family court seems unconstitutional in my book. Where is a show to emphasize that unfairness? Instead, we are going to be treated to men being humiliated, harassed, and having their houses foreclosed on. How is that helpful?

If Fox wants to know more about the plight of "deadbeat dads," they would do well to read Stephen Baskerville's Taken into Custody. In a chapter entitled "Deadbeat Dads or Plundered Pops," Baskerville explains that the objective data shows that there is little scientific evidence that large numbers of fathers are not paying support. The government bases most of these claims not on hard figures but rather, the Census Bureau simply asked mothers what they were receiving. The non-custodial parent was never surveyed. In addition, the astronomical figures owed are inflated as they are based on hypothetical formulas of what would be owed under circumstances that do not exist. This makes it seem like dads are worse than they are.

And what about deadbeat moms? Is anyone going after them?

Update: Protest the show here.



Blogger Edgehopper said...

I don't see the problem, really. Even if most dads are fine, there are actual deadbeat dads who deserve this kind of treatment. I'd prefer it if it were more gender neutral, obviously, and I hope (though I'm sure it won't) that it'll be limited to guys who weren't screwed over in the initial court proceeding. But the basic concept sounds fine to me.

2:49 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger Unknown said...

So Dr. Helen, do you believe that dead beat dads should just be able to get away with whatever? Or just that it is being televised? In the one case provided a guy is confronted in his country club. He isn't able to pay child support? I'd have to agree about this case; take him for all they can!
If it's just that's it is being televised I can agree with you. But why start here? Why not cut other reality shows like the stuff on BET or MTV? Does Tila Tequila really need more attention? How about Flava Flav? Lets start with the shows that take away the most brain cells and then work toward things that SHOULD be done just NOT televised.

PS- Is it ok for conservatives to go against FOX?

2:49 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger Wayne said...

Of course, the show is going to start out with a "wealthy ex-husband, who is living the high life." It's going to send the message that this kind of treatment is what all men who don't pay their court-ordered support deserves. It won't address the average Joe who is completely willing to support his children, but isn't able to make the full payments all the time, yet receives treatment like this anyway.

I worked with a woman once who had married a man who was making child support payments, but the had some sort of problem with his employment (don't remember whether it was a health issue or if he was just out of work for a while), and SHE made his support payments for something like 6 months or a year, so his support would be kept up. She didn't know, however, that such payments HAD to go through the court, so even though she had written what the checks were for on the memo line on the checks, and she had all the cashed checks (endorsed by his ex) for the entire time, they still came and arrested him and put him in jail for 6 months, because he was a "deadbeat".

3:06 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger Helen said...


You are correct, many "deadbeat dads" are unemployed and the judge expects the dad to pay no matter what, sometimes based on what he should be making and not what he actually is. Throwing men in jail for owing money is unfair and unjust. Debtors prisons went out of style a long time ago--but apparently not if you happen to be male.

3:10 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger gs said...

Helen, yes the show seems like distorted inflammatory trash, but why do you consider it unconstitutional?

3:36 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger Peregrine John said...

Deadbeat moms? Come on, now. They exist, surely, but in such insignificant numbers that they'd be hard-pressed to make a series based on it. Maybe 1 episode/season during the ratings blitz or something. That'd do.

Besides, if you focus too much on deadbeat moms people will get the idea that all moms are either like this or potentially like this, and that would hurt both the reputation and self-esteem of the feminine viewership. That couldn't happen with men, who don't have those sorts of feelings and only watch sports in any case.

Plus, men are lazy asses anyway who are 1 adulterous fling away from being deadbeat dads anyway...

3:42 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger Helen said...


Sorry I didn't make myself clear--I think it should be unconstitutional to throw men in jail for not paying child support--the show I find just distasteful. Nowhere else is not paying a debt (which BTW could affect children directly as well) treated so harshly with jail time and whatever mistreatment the state sees fit. How is throwing a man in jail going to help and many of these men are poor or unemployed?

3:53 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger Helen said...


And I should add that it seems unfair and should be illegal to harass these fathers on tv--take their houses and make their lives miserable--why should they have the right to do that? People who commit violent crimes have more rights than this.

3:58 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger gs said...

Thanks for the clarification, Helen.

Presumably there are counterarguments and I haven't formed an opinion, but IMO you have a strong point. It seems Constitutionally dubious to imprison people for nonpayment of child support. Also dubious to outsource collection to entities that are bound neither by the constraints, such as they are, on government agencies nor by the restrictions on private debt collectors.

(Just saw your second reply. Is harassment on TV indecent and abusive? In many cases, yes, especially on shows like this one seems to be. However, making it illegal would raise First-Amendment issues IMHO. But I don't mean to hijack the post, which on the whole I agree with.)

4:18 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger Helen said...


I think that the point about making the guy's life miserable, digging through his assets, seeing that his house is foreclosed on etc. is extreme. Should television shows do this? What about dock the guy's wages, take money from his tax return etc.? Why is this creep going after people like they are hardened criminals on the loose and trying to get their house etc. taken away out of vindictiveness?

First amendment guarantees that we can say things on tv--it does not give shows the right to violate people and work to ruin them. And what about libel? If the show goes after a dad and makes statements about the man based on what an ex wife said, who is to say they are true? They might be false--if I were harassed and destroyed by this guy, I would turn around and drag him through court. In fact, every man on the show who is confronted should do that and tie them up in litigation.

4:29 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger Alex said...

I'm waiting for Cham's trollerific response to this one.

4:30 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger gs said...

Oops! It was my impression that the US Constitution forbids imprisonment for debt. Apparently not.

First amendment guarantees that we can say things on tv--it does not give shows the right to violate people and work to ruin them.


5:10 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger Trust said...

@Alex said... "I'm waiting for Cham's trollerific response to this one."

I wouldn't put Cham in the troll category. I almost always disagree with her, but she does engage in dialogue, make points, and, unlike many leftist posters who disagree with me, she does tend to respond with points rather than insults. (On another blog, a woman accused me of wanting poor kids to die in the street because I was against government health care. That is the kind of person I would call a troll.)


8:16 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger Christian J. said...

"Deadbeat moms? Come on, now. They exist, surely"

Firstly, the courts are loathed to charge women with child support, so they automatically get a reprive which men (the ATM) are hardly ever exempt even if the women is earning a lot more than he does...

Secondly, it's difficult for a father to be forced to pay child support when the women denies him access to his own children and in some cases do not even know where they are.

Thirdly, the father has no comeback on whether or not his where child support, is it to the kids or a new wardrobe or boob job for her so she can go out and chase other males.

All I see but the comment above is blatant sexism and generalising which feminists seem to wallow in without fear or facts.

8:29 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger Unknown said...

Peregrine John --

And, just who gets to decide the numbers are insignificant?

My first wife ditched me and my daughter to run off and break into warehouses with a bad boy. I filed in absentia and then she married him in county jail.

A woman my second wife was babysitting for left her 2 year old son Josh with us and disappeared. Literally. Came back a year and a half later (after we'd wracked ourselves finding his dad, lovely lady didn't bother telling us who that was or the fact he had a different last name) and wanted him back.

They're there, they're real and there are enough to make several seasons at least.

8:41 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger BobH said...

I wonder if the tone of these television shows isn't somehow related to the fact that women control a wildly disproportionate percentage of the money being spent on consumer goods and, after all, these shows must have sponsors trying to sell something. The guy makes the money, then gives it, voluntarily or otherwise, to some woman who then spends it...right?? So these shows pander to women who are convinced that men are scum, even the men who are supporting these women.

8:59 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger Wayne said...

Helen, I may not have made it clear that I was primarily responding to the first two comments, which implied that the behavior of this Durham character was Ok, since they were "deadbeat dads", but it was irresponsible or distasteful to show it on television, and I was pointing out to them that not all of these "deadbeat dads" are just jerks who don't want to give up their money.

9:36 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger Micha Elyi said...

Jim Durham calls himself a "director" of a so-called "National Child Support Center" yet he and those he fronts for have completely wiped out of their brains the awareness that parenting time is also a valuable form of child support. He wouldn't dare talk his smack to malicious moms who deny children the necessary support that a father provides through his parenting time. To demand that the only support a father is good for is cash is an extremely brutal expression of sexism. It's a femi-normative sexism, one might say, because to reduce a dad's parenting to nothing but cash presumes that the real parenting/nurturing/caring for a child is measured by the traditional female role.

By the way, didn't Karl Marx claim that capitalism, not the State and its ever-lovin' courts, would ruin human relationships by turning their every nexus into nothing but cold, hard cash?

9:54 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger Bruce Hayden said...

I have no doubt that the show will do quite well, among the preferred demographic of non-working women. That is, until they cross the line and get sued by the guy.

The problem is not really the comparison between deadbeat dads and moms, but rather between deadbeat dads and moms who don't do their part, and in particular, who alienate the kids from their fathers and deprive them of visitation, etc.

This is because, no matter how equitable the laws are written, women have a big advantage in getting custody and support over men, regardless of merit.

11:13 PM, April 24, 2008  
Blogger bobby said...

Lawyer here. Ex-family-law-guy, "ex" because it was so damn depressing. Some observations:

You can find exceptional stories that make any effort, any idea, any process, any value look stupid and venal and unfair and . . .

But . . .

Numerically, the single broke mom whose ex-husband refuses to pay, pays slowly, or pays what HE says is fair instead of the ordered amount far, FAR outnumbers the misunderstood Joe who's been trying but falls short.

Put 100 broke single moms with kids over here in this corner. Put poor average Joe the appliance mechanic who just doesn't make enough to pay the exorbitant support the court ordered over in that corner.

Yeah, there are real people in both corners. But let's not write policy as if the corners are even close to being equally crowded.

12:06 AM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger lovemelikeareptile said...

Bobby is a good example of how one can get a JD and still be a very poor logician. He does exemplify how lawyers exploit lies to make themselves a buck.

1. Hey, Bobby-- think maybe the gals that could afford your exorbitant fees for stretching out the process of collection to pad your wallet might be an atypical subset of women seeking back child support ?

Think maybe they come to/and can afford a lawyer because they have a very good case--eg-- he owes the money, he can pay it rather easily , and he isn't
you sure as hell only represent a woman if she is going after a guy with bucks so you can make a good payday.
I mean you don't represent these women out of the goodness of your heart, but because there is an excellant probability of a good pay day for you.
Since the only cases you take are the stereotypical "dead beat dad''-- obviously thats all you see!

The numbers confirm that the "deadbeat dad" is a fiction... Read them

2. A lawyer always wants to know where the money is-- so lawyers will perpetuate any fiction and any policy , however false, that lets them get the money with the least effort.
If the "deadbeat dad" myth was exposed, Bobby Lawyer would have a hard time riding public contempt for men to an easy pay day for himself.

Family Law is all about looking for the money and forcing income transfers from men to women.

The laws concerning paternity and child support have one goal-- find the nearest available male to pay for these kids so the state will not have to. Thats why men have no rights in the process-- and are not likely to receive any.
Law is only about policy and policy is only about-- the money and lawyers are only about -- the money.

2:25 AM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger Helen said...


I have heard lawyers give me the same line as Bobby. Funny, in the years I have worked with men, a large number of them take care of kids and have an ex-wife who will not pay child support. Rarely do the men even go after them or try to collect the money and if they do, nothing ever happens. Like you say, Bobby the lawyer has a skewed sample, just as I probably did. The difference is, the courts and lawyers like Bobby favor women and think men deserve whatever they get.

5:07 AM, April 25, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are lots of different stories, for lots of different reasons. Most of them are anti male, regardless.

I ended up with the kids (thank the stars) and still pay for the ex - and because he's there, her live in useless boyfriend she met in the psychiatric hospital.

Hospital bills, doctors and meds, straight from the pocket leave me flat and living from pay check to pay check. Not to mention the almost daily threatening phone calls from creditors and the above already mentioned. I got tired of it years ago. But it's still there, and seems it will remain so.

I'm not the lone ranger either.

6:53 AM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger skinsfan1313 said...

What about the non custodial parent that just moves around, goes from job to job just so the don't have to pay. My ex will work for 3 months, when DR catches up to him, he quits. I have not received a regular child support payment since 2004, I get maybe $100.00 a year once he files his taxes. I am owed over $25,000, and you don't think my ex's sorry butt belongs in jail. You are wrong. If you put them in jail, make them do work release and take all there money until they are caught up.
Is it fair to my children that I can't afford to pay for them to do sports or pay for prescriptions? NO!!!
No it's not just dads, but something needs to be done to the parents that don't want to live up to their obligations. It takes two to make a child and both parents should have to support them.

10:05 AM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger BobH said...

To skinsfan1313:

So you ex is willing to put up with a lot of financial instability in his life just to avoid giving you any money? (Oh, of course, the money is for the CHILDREN, right?) In fact, it sounds like he might be willing to go to jail to accomplish the same goal. That's pretty harsh. It also says a lot about his opinion of you. Have you ever considered that maybe you deserve his bad opinion?

Actually, willing to damage oneself to also damage somebody else is the very definition of "spite", which isn't considered rational behavior. It's also quite common. Check out an economic game called "Ultimatum" in economic game theory.

As far as I'm concerned it's all just prostitution anyway.

10:57 AM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger Unknown said...

Maybe if shacking with or marrying bad-boys entailed actual, obvious risk - without the appearance of mitigation by a pro-female court system down the road - then some young women might make safer choices for their mates?

12:21 PM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger Wayne said...

bobh - I have to back skinsfan1313 on this one. There are a number of men out there who don't care about financial stability, and if they feel "injured" by the divorce process, will sink to just such tactics as she describes. I know it's hard to believe, but it's true. I've known many of them myself.

skinsfan1313 - On the other hand, most people aren't saying that someone who acts like this is deserving of our forgiveness. Just that the tactics used by these collectors is blind to any mitigating factors, and that many fathers who are essentially good, responsible people still get savaged by the legal system regardless of circumstances in a lot of these cases. And that a "Reality Show" such as this one will reinforce the message that men are hateful SOBs who don't care about either their ex or their children.

1:18 PM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger Quasimodo said...

I knew an oral surgeon who let his wife finance his education. He moved the family out west and he did his residency there. When he was all finished he dumped her and the kids and went to work at McDonald's. His support was based on what he earned flipping burgers. As soon as that was settled he moved back to the midwest - leaving them in Arizona. He started his medical practice in the midwest, but the last I heard his child support was at the you-want-fries-with-that level.

Class act, no?

1:37 PM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger BobH said...

And his wife let him get away with this? I don't believe that story for a minute!! It's just too easy and too lucrative for the wife to go back to court and get the child support bumped WAY up.

1:55 PM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger Serket said...

As for the aggressive tactics, child support is not considered a debt per se, but an order of the court. Collectors are therefore not subject to following the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which regulates what tactics a collection agency can employ to collect a debt.

This would be good to change so that it is more fair.

My uncle was married for about 2 years and he caught his wife sleeping with his friend. They later divorced and he was forced to pay child support. Eventually he gave up custody of them because he couldn't afford to pay. Their mother would not allow the kids to see their dad. Now that they are adults they have sought him out. The oldest daughter actually remembers him and she is more receptive to him. I hear the younger daughter (who just turned 21) is also starting to open up, but she is more hesitant.

Sean: PS- Is it ok for conservatives to go against FOX?

Nope. You might not have noticed, but she linked to a FOX article about dead beat moms. I've noticed that FOX is perceived as the conservative channel, but it seems to me like they are always trying provocative programming. My dad thinks they are just trying to be different from the other channels.

On a related note what did you guys think about the show "Who's Your Daddy?" I watched one episode of it. I think adopted children should be able to find their biological parents if they want to.

It looks like some of you might not have read it, but according to the FOX article she linked to, there are more "deadbeat" mothers.

2:21 PM, April 25, 2008  
Blogger PunditJoe said...

Heh heh, makes me glad I turned off my cable recently. I honestly just got tired of all the junk - not least of which was the constant male bashing. I don't need to pay money for that.

3:50 PM, April 25, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


I'm a bit skeptical of your story because there is a concept of "imputed income" that is regularly applied in court proceedings.

Maybe the wife needs a lawyer who knows what he's doing.

12:03 PM, April 26, 2008  
Blogger Quasimodo said...

different states and jurisdictions. I knew them both - I believe her story without question.

However, the situation may have been rectified since we last heard form her, but that was the state she was in at that time.

3:44 PM, April 26, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The second issue, though, is that child support is supposed to support the child, not mommy.

Some high earners are routinely ordered to pay $30,000 per month or more in child support.

That is pure mommy support. I'd quit my job too if courts didn't set an imputed income.

4:17 PM, April 26, 2008  
Blogger Unknown said...

As long as mothers can opt out of parenthood via abortion why shouldn't fathers be able to opt out of parenthood via not paying child support? It seems fair to me.

8:02 PM, April 26, 2008  
Blogger Cham said...

Potential fathers DO have a way to opt out of parenting. It costs about $3 and you can find it at Wal-Mart.

8:28 PM, April 26, 2008  
Blogger Unknown said...


You're really getting ripped off if you pay $3 for a rubber. They're ~$1 here.
In any case preventing a child isn't the same as being able to opt out of parenting after the child exists. Either sex could prevent a child for free.
Abortion involves an 'after the fact' decision. It's only fair that men be able to simply say 'I don't want to be a parent' and wash their hands of the whole thing as long as women can.

8:51 PM, April 26, 2008  
Blogger BobH said...

To Cham:

Of course!! When bad things happen to men, it's men's fault and male behavior that must be changed. When bad things happen to women, it's men's fault and male behavior that must be changed. Do you notice a pattern here??

9:57 PM, April 26, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

9:58 PM, April 26, 2008  
Blogger JH Bassist said...

Maybe they should produce a show about women who file false DV charges during custody battles.

Oh, wait, that never happens, right?

9:35 AM, April 27, 2008  
Blogger JH Bassist said...

Maybe they should also produce a show about mothers who consistently violate visitation agreements and destroy their children with parental alienation.

Part of this show should should deal with the fact that family courts usually ignore violation of visitation agreements. Why? Because there's no money to be made enforcing them.

When people pay child support through the court system, the court charges a fee. That's means more money for the states. But there are no fees generated via enforcing visitation. So gee, which one do you think the courts are going to concentrate on?

Follow the money - it usually tells you the truth.

The states drummed up bogus deadbeat dad campaigns to generate income. It's that simple. Percentage wise, there has never really been a deadbeaqt dad problem. The HUGE majority of men ordered to pay child support pay it.

Let's get away from the myth that there actually is a horrific, widespread deadbeat dad problem, because there isn't.

BTW - statistics show that the percentage of women ordered to pay child support and alimony who don't pay is WAY higher than men. The real 'deadbeat' dads are actually 'deadbeat moms.'

9:50 AM, April 27, 2008  
Blogger Helen said...


I agree that a reality show about women who violate visitation, bash the dad in front of the kids and ruin relationships, go after men for revenge to get them put in jail for non-payment of child support despite the reasons, fake sexual harassment charges, etc., fake paternity etc. would make a heck of a show for ESPN or some channel but no one would ever touch it--and I am not sure men would come out to diss women in the same way that women will to get revenge on men.

11:08 AM, April 27, 2008  
Blogger JH Bassist said...

Dr. Helen,

" . . . and I am not sure men would come out to diss women in the same way that women will to get revenge on men."

No doubt about that. We'll have to wait another ten years or so for chivalry to die the death it deserves.

In ten years, the marriage rate will have probably dropped by 20% or so anyway. Marriage itself is an anachronism that is no longer supported by the culture that ironically depends on it. We're going to have our hands full figuring out how to rearrange a society whose capitalist structure depends on the spending of the traditional family - since the traditional family is fast going the way of the Bronze Age.

11:18 AM, April 27, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually, the biggest bunch of deadbeats we have is congress. Both sides, and both genders in both sides of the aisle.

12:05 PM, April 27, 2008  
Blogger Helen said...


What about a reality show called "Pork Busters" where we chase down members of Congress when they approve wasteful spending and browbeat them --pehaps get laws passed where they might even have to spend time in jail if they are found to have purposely wasted tax payers money. I'm all for it.

7:00 AM, April 28, 2008  
Blogger JH Bassist said...


I think you're missing the point. Yes, congress wastes money. They always have. But this is specifically about misandry. Let's focus in the issue.

8:01 AM, April 28, 2008  
Blogger Eric said...

When I was a kid, the post offices used to have "FBI Most Wanted" posters on the walls. Now they're featuring wanted "deadbeat dads."

While this is not to defend flaky fathers, a TV show like this boosts the phenomenon into a primary morals offense against society, and makes it appear much more common than it is.

But will these deadbeat dad "crime and punishment" shows function as a deterrent? I think they might, but not necessarily in the way intended. Boys who grow up watching shows like this might very well decide that being a father is the root cause of the problem, and therefore not worth the risk, especially if the message is that fatherhood equals pay up or go to jail.

They might as well run giant billboard ads with this message:


8:45 AM, April 28, 2008  
Blogger JH Bassist said...


. . . "this boosts the phenomenon into a primary morals offense against society, and makes it appear much more common than it is."

That's exactly the point. Percentage-wise, deadbeat dad-ism is NOT A COMMON PROBLEM. All of the deadbeat dad talk we hear in the media is propaganda.

8:56 AM, April 28, 2008  
Blogger Peregrine John said...

Ok, I've stopped laughing long enough to actually type clearly. c and o, obviously - obviously - I was joking, my sarcasm stream set at Fully Drench. The well-discredited link at the end was in case some new visitor to the site, who was unused to the wry ways of the non-humor-bereft regulars here, was uncertain of it. You two definitely should know better.

Oh geez. Well, at least I got some entertainment from the responses.

10:52 AM, April 28, 2008  
Blogger Noslack said...

I seem to have exhausted any possibility of viable resources for getting help (psychological) with parental alienation in Knoxville. I happened upon your blog and sensed that you may be able to guide me in some way. Can you channel me in the right direction? Thanks!

6:18 PM, April 28, 2008  
Blogger Unknown said...

I don't know any men who are in arrears on their child support. I know a few women who are. Nothing happens to them. Most of them are of the opinion that if he dares take them to court, she'll demand custody, get it, and he'll have to start paying HER, and lose his kids.

I do know men that used to work in parts of the country that have a high cost of living. The industry they worked in collapsed, and they had to move out of state. The difference in wages mean they're working 2 jobs to try and pay child support, plus they live out of state and can't see their kids (yes, they applied for a modification - what a joke). No reason for the ex to move, she's living off of the child support. Why should she be frugal?

I do know women who play games with visitation and their kids' affection for the other parent, and my ex has never paid her child support. It's $140 a month, about $110 less a month than a man who makes minimum wage would pay, and about 1/6th of what I had to pay. No one's been able to prove she's working, and there's no way to garnish her wages. Oh well, different rules for women. You'll understand when I scoff at the whole "equality" crap I hear. BE equal - it's not a passive verb, rather it requires action.

My state tops out at around $6000 a month for child support, and typically does not award long term spousal support. That $6000 a month would come from someone making $360,000 a year, which is no-one that I personally know.

Personally, I think sex ed for boys should include someone from the county's child support enforcement, and both a family law and criminal law attorney, to let the little idiots know what happens when their naughty bits get all tingly and engorged.

11:11 PM, April 28, 2008  
Blogger Bill Stoneking said...

A Show on domestically violent women, false accusers and child abusers who violate custody, orders of protection and subject children to invasive sexual abuse examinations to facilitate their violations of custody (criminal deprivations a.k.a. Acts of Domestic Violence) needs to be out. Let's put a true face of some who should be locked up.

I'll share my case as an example, from all of these downloads here.

See my article on why the Platte County Missouri Prosecutor shouldn't be the Platte County Missouri Prosecutor on my blog at

Download the female judges comments in my case and what her findings were and why custody in my ex's hands equates to the judge licensing domestic violence by a woman with a history of child abuse.

"The Diary of a Patient Man, A Father's Struggle" chronicles my nightmares and reflects the truth that gets swept away in dealing with men's rights, father's rights and the rights of their children.

If Fox moves forward with this distorted show, then not only boycott Fox but boycott Fox's sponsors too. This will send a message when dollars dip from consumers and Sponsors are hammered.

Kind Regards,

Bill Stoneking

1:42 AM, April 29, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


I doubt anyone with the exception of bill stoneking has been through more than my kids and myself in this arena. All I literally have left is a sense of humor. I have, somehow, managed to stay out of jail. My situation still exists, with no way out. I am male, you see, and therefore have a penis. I have always been relatively successful, (but it's hard work, requiring much travel) and have to pay through the wazoo because of that.

I wondered if my situation was unique. After my own situation was "over", I went and sat in the last row of local divorce court, for a week straight, just to observe. I have recommended the same to all who write in on this subject, especially those considering marriage.

Oh, I get it.

6:38 AM, April 29, 2008  
Blogger JH Bassist said...


"Personally, I think sex ed for boys should include someone from the county's child support enforcement, and both a family law and criminal law attorney, to let the little idiots know what happens when their naughty bits get all tingly and engorged."

Along with this, I recommend that all men see an attorney BEFORE they get married just to get a realistic lay of the land. Most men go into marriage blind of the statistics and the realities.

Of course, all men should have a pre-nup anyway. This goes without saying. But there should be some kind of pre-marital legal counseling for men in addition to the writing of pre-nups.

We should also abolish the family courts and settle divorces in civil court. Nothing is ever going to change unless we get the states out of the marriage business.

10:26 AM, April 29, 2008  
Blogger Unknown said...

What did these men do to justify the debtor's prisons, confiscation of property, money, future earnings, micro-managing where they work, for whom they work, how many jobs they work, etc.... if the divorce were "NO-FAULT"?

Child support should first be questioned as to lawfulness of taking children from an innocent parent and second as to who is the least stable parent ending a marriage for self-aggrandizment at the great cost to the children. Child poverty, abuse, sexual molestation, major psychological problems, teen pregnancy, promiscuity, drug addictions, perversions, etc. all skyrocket when the children are taken from the father and handed to a single mother. Even 'bad dads' generally raise better and healthier citizens than single mothers. So we pay women to destroy our children. That is really smart. What is even more 'smart' is then destroying daddy with an overwhelming and draconion debt that so overburdens most men as to make even seeing their children painful.

Every time some faithless and foolish mother files for 'no-fault' divorce expecting money, power, and control over her husband enforced at the point of a gun, (or a financial 'hit man') we are all supposed to automatically assume that he must be at fault so he must pay. We do this even when the woman claims a "NO-FAULT" DIVORCE.

Women are clearly the gatekeepers of sex and child birth, yet we place the onerous burdens not on the one truly responsible, but on the least responsible. Women can even have legal post-birth abortions by handing children over to hospitals, adoption agencies etc.. And this is called a reproduction right. Where are men's reproduction rights. If a man attempts to bail out as a parent as women overwhelmingly do, we throw him in jail. Women can kill or abandon fetuses and children at will through numerous directions, lawfully. Millions of abortions are committed each year by women.

If, as a businessman, the law stated that anyone I contract with can bail at anytime with "no fault" on my behalf but can still receive all the benefits of the contract from me, this is fraud. If I were fully informed of that fact I would not do business. Would you? Or would you expect that criminal fraud to go to jail for committing her fraud. Why do we reward marital fraud.

The courts and legislators claim their draconion laws and enforcement is for "the best interest of the child". Yet women are the greatest abusers of children in our country, frequently not by mere 'margins' but by 'multipliers' when compared to biological fathers. Our courts and legislators remove protective and nurturing fathers and turn them into wallets much likes the Nazis turned Jews into lampshades.

No-Fault divorce should also mean no child-support and no child custody for the person filing this statement of intent to defraud. Why should we let our most unstable and fraudulent parents have the children and all the power to abuse that entails.

A Dad Forever, even when beat-dead.

10:41 AM, April 29, 2008  
Blogger JH Bassist said...

Great post, Stan.

11:30 AM, April 29, 2008  
Blogger Unknown said...

Thanks to Dr. Helen for opening up this discussion in such a positive manner. This is a very under-debated topic in the general public. Kudos to the good Dr. Helen.


9:38 PM, April 29, 2008  
Blogger Unknown said...

I wonder if Fox would greenlight a show called "Bad Blacks?"

It really is amazing -- fathers are the last group that it's politically correct to bash.

7:00 PM, May 02, 2008  
Blogger Unknown said...

Maybe we could ask them to do a reality tv program on 'really bad reality tv ideas', kind of a 'deadly blooper' program that juxtaposes the tens of thousands of male suicide each year as a result of the draconion and demeaning measures used to remove men from the family in America.

At the website page on gender breakdown for the American Association of Suicidology (AAS)found at , the numbers for men are three to 5 times higher than for women. These are almost all parent age men. These men overwhelming take their own lives as a result of our discarding fathers and using them as wage slaves after taking their children, subjecting them to dehumanizing treatments in family court, false allegations, destroying the children's affection for their own fathers, and then to top it off the AAS has the gall to offer grants to study why women commit suicide but no grants for studying why men kill themselves at 4 to 5 times higher rates.

Our combat troops are committing 'suicide by combat' in alarmingly high rates. The military documents these deaths overwhelmingly are attributed to 'relational issues'. Further research on my part came up with greater detail. These suicides were by men who while deployed overseas had their wives file for divorce, move in with another man, get pregnant by another man, have the courts award whatever the woman wanted because the father did not show up at the hearings (remember he is in combat) where impossible child support awards were made and the father was denied all future access to his children.

All of this and more happens to our men in combat when they can not defend themselves in family law courts across the country because this man is risking his life in combat. And the military wonders why recruitment is down.

8:23 AM, May 03, 2008  
Blogger JH Bassist said...


Thanks very much for your last post. People need to know about this. You should post this comment here as well . . .

10:35 AM, May 03, 2008  
Blogger JH Bassist said...

Anyone who wants to join the protest against this show and send a direct message to FOX should go here:

10:37 AM, May 03, 2008  
Blogger cricketgo-Mary said...

I think the way men are treated when it comes to child support is appalling. I never thought much about it until my son divorced and came home to live until he could get on his feet. He went to work here at a low paying job and although he was unemployed at the time of his divorce, his payment was still based on $100 a week income, the comment was according to his ex wife, "he can pick up beer cans and make that much" To make a long story short I ended up supporting him so he could pay his child support! He still ended up behind on it as he lost his job for a while. They took his drivers license,vehicle license, right to vote,right to a hunting license, and I assume he can be arrested at any time. Even though his payments are low, he can't afford it. He has to take care of himself. He is not trying to get out of paying, he wants to pay. Honestly if I was him I would not be so noble. I would be doing all I could to get out of it because it is wrong to take your rights away because you don't have money to pay what they order for child support.

8:41 PM, July 26, 2008  
Blogger Unknown said...

Deadbeat moms? I dont think such a thing exists. A woman destroys her body and puts her life and health in jeopardy to carry and give birth to a child. I think its a fair trade for this gift and sacrifice a woman makes for a man. Men stop whining and appreciate the gift you are given. You can not compare what a woman goes through to have a child to anything. What do you contribute. You shouldn't even complain about anything you have the most fun making them and then most dont want to pay for them. I think all women should have an uprising and consider a fair exchange that if she carries the child the father should take care of it. Its only fair that he sacrifice himself in that way if she sacraficed her beauty health and body for him. Thats a lot to give up for someone. Why cant they take on some responsibility. I wish I was a dad and I could throw money at a problem instead of being there and being responsible for raising the child putting a roof over their head and food in there stomache. Worrying about them all the time their education their safety and if they are up late nights being sick. Grow up and be the men you ssay you are and stop whining about sexism.

10:26 PM, November 21, 2008  
Blogger JH Bassist said...


Statistics show that the the majority of men ordered to pay child support pay it in full and on time. Statistics also show that - percentage wise - the percentage of women ordered to pay child support who don't pay is higher than the percentage of men who don't pay. When you want to climb out of your rabbit hole and look at some facts, be my guest.

Basically, your comment is a typical 'Women good, mad bad' routine that men are no longer putting up with. It's old hat and it's why men are opting out of relationships with women like you.

You really are typical of the way society thinks. Women can hem and haw all they want, but men just have to 'shut up and take it.' You also exemplify the double standards of gender feminism, where women claim to want 'independence and liberation' on the one hand, but want to be catered to and taken care of on the other. You can only play a 'have our cake and eat it too' game for so long before people start to wise up. And men are wising up, believe me. We are not just going to sit there and 'take it' while women file 70% of divorces and the anti-family courts destroy families for their own gain.

Actually, you are not a feminist. Everything you state indicates a traditional chivalry mind-set. If you want that mind-set turned into a reality, you're going to have to give up all the feminist gains that women have enjoyed. Sorry lady, but equality means 'equality,' not just the parts you enjoy. You have to take the bad with the good. It's a tough world out there. Enjoy it.

And for your information, no woman deserves to be treated like the virgin mary just because she had a kid. My mother's generation didn't expect it, and they're a thousand times tougher than the current generation. Most of the 60+ women I know think that today's women are a bunch of spoiled, selfish brats.

BTW - maybe some women should just keep their legs closed. It takes two to tango.

6:48 AM, November 22, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...









6:12 AM, February 10, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

H漫 - 卡通美女短片
辣妹視訊 - 免費聊天室

11:36 AM, February 16, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Canton Fair
Guangzhou Hotel

4:49 AM, February 23, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


8:43 AM, March 04, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A片-無碼援交東京熱一本道aaa免費看影片免費視訊聊天室微風成人ut聊天室av1688影音視訊天堂85cc免費影城亞洲禁果影城微風成人av論壇sex520免費影片JP成人網免費成人視訊aaa影片下載城免費a片 ut交友成人視訊85cc成人影城免費A片aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片小魔女免費影城免費看 aa的滿18歲影片sex383線上娛樂場kk777視訊俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片85cc免費影片a片免費看A片-sex520視訊做愛聊天室plus論壇sex520免費影片avdvd-情色網qq美美色網ut13077視訊聊天85cc免費影片aaa片免費看短片aa影片下載城aaaaa片俱樂部影片aaaaa片俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片台灣論壇免費影片後宮0204movie免費影片免費卡通影片線上觀看線上免費a片觀看85cc免費影片免費A片aa影片下載城ut聊天室辣妹視訊UT影音視訊聊天室 日本免費視訊aaaa 片俱樂部aaa片免費看短片aaaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看短片免費視訊78論壇情色偷拍免費A片免費aaaaa片俱樂部影片av俱樂部aaaa彩虹頻道免費影片 杜蕾斯成人免費卡通影片線上觀看85cc免費影片線上觀賞免費線上歐美A片觀看免費a片卡通aaa的滿18歲卡通影片sex520免費影片免費 a 片

2:26 AM, April 15, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ドルチェ&ガッバーナDOLCE & GABBANAドルチェ&ガッバーナ バッグドルチェ&ガッバーナ 財布ドルチェ&ガッバーナ ネックレスドルチェ&ガッバーナ サングラスドルチェ&ガッバーナ リングドルチェ&ガッバーナ 香水ドルチェ&ガッバーナ シューズドルチェ&ガッバーナ アウタードルチェ&ガッバーナ インナードルチェ&ガッバーナ シャツドルチェ&ガッバーナ ジーンズドルチェ&ガッバーナ 時計ドルチェ&ガッバーナ Tシャツグッチgucciグッチ バッググッチ 財布グッチ ネックレスグッチ サングラスグッチ リンググッチ 香水グッチ シューズグッチ アウターグッチ シャツグッチ ジーンズグッチ 時計グッチ Tシャツグッチ アウターグッチ インナーディオールChristian Diorディオール バッグディオール 財布ディオール ネックレスディオール サングラスディオール リングディオール 香水ディオール シューズディオール アウターディオール シャツディオール ジーンズディオール Tシャツディオール 時計ディオール インナーヴィトンLOUIS VUITTONヴィトン バッグヴィトン 財布ヴィトン ネックレスヴィトン サングラスヴィトン リングヴィトン シューズヴィトン アウターヴィトン シャツヴィトン ジーンズヴィトン Tシャツヴィトン 時計シャネルCHANELシャネル バッグシャネル 財布シャネル ネックレスシャネル サングラスシャネル リングシャネル 香水シャネル シューズシャネル アウターシャネル シャツシャネル ジーンズシャネル Tシャツシャネル 時計シャネル インナーシャネル ワンピースプラダpradaプラダ バッグプラダ 財布プラダ ネックレスプラダ サングラスプラダ キーリングプラダ 香水プラダ シューズプラダ アウタープラダ シャツプラダ ジーンズプラダ Tシャツプラダ 時計フェラガモSALVATORE FERRAGAMOフェラガモ バッグフェラガモ 財布フェラガモ ネックレスフェラガモ サングラスフェラガモ キーリングフェラガモ 香水フェラガモ シューズフェラガモ アウターフェラガモ シャツフェラガモ パンツフェラガモ Tシャツフェラガモ 時計セリーヌCELINEセリーヌ バッグセリーヌ 財布セリーヌ ネックレスセリーヌ サングラスセリーヌ リングセリーヌ 香水セリーヌ シューズセリーヌ アウターセリーヌ シャツセリーヌ ジーンズセリーヌ TシャツボッテガBOTTEGA VENETAボッテガ バッグボッテガ 財布ボッテガ ネックレスボッテガ サングラスボッテガ リングボッテガ 香水ボッテガ シューズボッテガ アウターボッテガ シャツボッテガ ジーンズボッテガ TシャツコーチCOACHコーチ バッグコーチ 財布コーチ ネックレスコーチ サングラスコーチ リングコーチ 香水コーチ シューズコーチ アウターコーチ シャツコーチ ジーンズコーチ Tシャツコーチ 時計ダンヒルdunhillダンヒル バッグダンヒル 財布ダンヒル カフスボタンダンヒル サングラスダンヒル リングダンヒル 香水ダンヒル シューズダンヒル アウターダンヒル シャツダンヒル ジーンズダンヒル Tシャツダンヒル 時計ロエベLOEWEロエベ バッグロエベ 財布ロエベ ネックレスロエベ サングラスロエベ キーホルダーロエベ 香水ロエベ シューズロエベ アウターロエベ シャツロエベ ジーンズロエベ TシャツディーゼルDIESELディーゼル バッグディーゼル 財布ディーゼル ネックレスディーゼル サングラスディーゼル リングディーゼル 香水ディーゼル シューズディーゼル アウターディーゼル シャツディーゼル ジーンズディーゼル Tシャツディーゼル 時計ディーゼル インナーデリヘル 大阪仙台 デリヘル仙台 風俗仙台 デリヘル仙台 風俗仙台 デリヘル仙台 風俗家族葬滋賀 賃貸葬儀 費用滋賀県の賃貸滋賀の賃貸アダルト SEO被リンク相互リンク茶道具 買取絵画 買取レザー革小物クレジットカード 現金化現金化ショッピング枠 現金化クレジットカード 現金化現金化ショッピング枠 現金化脱毛 大阪埋没 大阪わきが 大阪オーロラ 大阪クリニックエスニックタウンサーチ探偵 大阪浮気調査 大阪素行調査 大阪別れさせ 大阪吹田 美容室エステ 尼崎メナード 梅田資生堂マックスファクターノエビアSK-IIメナードカネボウアルビオンアナスイイヴサンローランエスティローダーエルメスクリスチャンディオールクロエシャネルジルスチュアートブルガリメイベリンランコムFXFX 比較FX 初心者ブランド通販ヴィヴィアンウエストウッドティファニーディオールドルチェ&ガッバーナダイエットダイエット食品美容ボディケア通販キャッシング大阪 賃貸中古車 販売ルームウェア大阪 マンション賃貸マンション 神戸中古 ゴルフクラブクールビズフィットネスクラブ大阪府 司法書士クレジット 申し込みベビードール矯正歯科 東京ホワイトニング 東京大阪 ラブホテルリサイクルショップ不動産カードローン投資 信託下着即日 キャッシング三井住友銀行神戸市 中央区 税理士FX消費者金融ローン引越し生命保険ジェルネイル人材派遣ネット証券アフィリエイト格安航空券ウィークリーマンションレンタカーSEOオフィス家具合宿免許ペット用品高速バスデリヘルキャバクラ派遣コラーゲン化粧品インテリアウェディング結婚相談投資物件留学貸事務所 大阪経営コンサルティング工芸品高級品自動車保険ホテヘルレストランウェディングバイク買取運転免許ベビーカー外反母趾圧力鍋腕時計フェラガモデリヘルキャバクラセレブプラセンタカルシウム青汁ブルーベリー家具脱毛クリーム除毛クリームコスト削減 大阪弁護士 大阪車買取 大阪バイク買取 大阪エステ 大阪リフォーム 大阪
大阪 歯科派遣 大阪アルバイト 大阪転職 大阪大阪 住宅大阪 専門学校グルメ 大阪ホテル 大阪一戸建て 大阪大阪 宿泊大阪 マンションデリヘル 大阪印刷 大阪不動産 大阪賃貸 大阪ブライダル 大阪リサイクルアダルト SEO賃貸SEO 大阪イベント コンパニオン 大阪転職 大阪大阪 ラブホペット ショップ 大阪豆腐京都 不動産運転免許 合宿ヘアアイロンダイエットダイエットデリヘルキャバクラシャンパン老人ホーム精力剤大阪 ラブホテルブランド品 買取ワイン京都 不動産ペットリサイクルショップ歯科求人結婚式場バイク便動物病院美容整形外科エルメスダイエットダイエット食品腕時計ヘアアイロンクレイツアイビルa
アドストバッグネイルアクセンツヘアアイロンクレイツシャンプーアイビルジェルネイル育毛剤ドライヤーアゲハ嬢ダイエットサプリリサイクルショップ 大阪リサイクルショップ 東京リサイクルショップ 名古屋fx 口座開設fx 資料請求FX 比較大阪 不動産不動産 投資不動産 比較投資 信託 大阪投資 信託 初心者下着 女性下着 男性下着 ブログ消費者金融 審査消費者金融 ランキング消費者金融 大阪ローン 比較ローン 自動車ローン 金利引っ越し 比較引っ越し 口コミ引っ越し 挨拶保険 資料請求保険 比較保険 ランキングジェルネイル やり方ジェルネイル デザインジェルネイル 激安人材派遣 関西人材派遣 仕組みネット証券 選び方ネット証券 初心者ネット証券 手数料アフィリエイト 初心者アフィリエイト 稼ぐアフィリエイト 比較国内格安航空券格安航空券 海外格安航空券 沖縄ウィークリーマンション 東京ウィークリーマンション 大阪ウィークリーマンション 福岡レンタカー 格安レンタカー 沖縄レンタカー 東京オフィス家具 中古オフィス家具 激安オフィス家具 買取合宿免許 激安合宿免許 沖縄合宿免許 大型ペット用品 激安ペット用品 犬ペット用品 通販高速バス 時刻表高速バス 名古屋高速バス 大阪デリヘル 仙台デリヘル 大阪デリヘル 東京キャバクラ 求人キャバクラ 東京キャバクラ 大阪圧力鍋 歴史圧力鍋 構造圧力鍋 ランキングフェラガモ バッグフェラガモ 靴フェラガモ 財布セレブ 海外セレブ ファションセレブ ゴシップ青汁 ランキング青汁 効果青汁 口コミブルーベリー 栽培ブルーベリー 利用ブルーベリー 生産家具 イケア家具 ニトリ家具 イームズ脱毛クリーム 永久脱毛クリーム 男性脱毛クリーム 比較除毛クリーム ランキング除毛クリーム 男性除毛クリーム トラブル弁護士 大阪 制度弁護士 大阪 費用弁護士 大阪 トラブル車買取 大阪 相場車買取 大阪 査定車買取 大阪 比較エステ 大阪 フェイシャルエステ 大阪 求人エステ 大阪 メンズリフォーム 大阪 キッチンリフォーム 大阪 マンションリフォーム 大阪 外壁大阪 歯医者 ランキング大阪 歯医者 料金大阪 歯医者 矯正派遣 大阪 求人派遣 大阪 短期派遣 大阪 ランキングアルバイト 大阪 検索アルバイト 大阪 短期アルバイト 大阪 口コミ転職 大阪 求人転職 大阪 ランキング転職 大阪 女性大阪 住宅 検索大阪 住宅 ローン大阪 住宅 中古専門学校 大阪 美容専門学校 大阪 看護専門学校 大阪 調理大阪 グルメ カフェ大阪 グルメ お好み焼き大阪 グルメ たこ焼きホテル 大阪 シティホテルホテル 大阪 ビジネスホテルホテル 大阪 モーテル大阪 一戸建て 検索大阪 一戸建て 口コミ大阪 一戸建て ランキング大阪 宿泊 格安大阪 宿泊 高級大阪 宿泊 口コミ大阪 マンション 新築大阪 マンション 中古大阪 マンション 賃貸大阪 デリヘル 人妻大阪 デリヘル OL大阪 デリヘル 3P印刷 大阪 チラシ印刷 大阪 名刺印刷 大阪 格安大阪 不動産 検索大阪 不動産 分譲大阪 不動産 比較大阪 賃貸 学生大阪 賃貸 格安大阪 賃貸 マンションブライダル 大阪 ホテルブライダル 大阪 ヘアブライダル 大阪 プランナーリサイクルショップ 東京リサイクルショップ 大阪リサイクルショップ 比較アダルト SEO 方法アダルト SEO 大阪アダルト SEO 口コミ賃貸 検索賃貸 大阪賃貸 学生リサイクルショップ 大阪リサイクルショップ 東京リサイクルショップ 名古屋ホワイトニング 東京 料金ホワイトニング 東京 口コミホワイトニング 東京 格安ベビードール 子供ベビードール 通販ベビードール 大阪大阪 司法書士 試験大阪 司法書士 年収大阪 司法書士 求人フィットネスクラブ 大阪フィットネスクラブ 仙台フィットネスクラブ 滋賀

6:54 AM, May 15, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

免費成人影片嘟嘟情人網影片大奶妹做愛影片微風成人區情色文學aa的滿18歲影片免費線上看a片性愛影片色咪咪影片網哈啦聊天室咆哮小老鼠影片aa成人漫畫葉晴貼影片影片轉檔程式情色影片foxy下載色情小說女影片免費下載a片aa免費看情色文學成人小說aa 片免費看影片 aa訊豆豆出租名模情人視訊

6:01 AM, June 08, 2009  

Post a Comment

<< Home