Abuse of Temporary Orders

[MrMan]

This is a surprisingly good article considering the website it is posted on. Many women and their lawyers abuse restraining orders and other legal instruments to give themselves an advantage in divorce, forcing men to set up a second household while providing from the first, separating them from their children, and keeping them from accessing necessary court documents.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-wors ... mg00000003

The article also points out that many of the websites that point out this problem use the type or rhetoric that undermines the effect of the website:

Given the foregoing, this problem is certainly one that our judicial system should address and remedy. Part of the reason I believe that it hasn't is due to the fact that, unfortunately, those raising this legitimate concern tend to do so using vitriolic rhetoric. Websites focusing on men's and father's rights abound, and most use bombastic language that pretty much undermines their point that these men are peaceful and non-threatening.

MRA organizations could create some training for judges and attorneys about these issues. They could also support candidates who are open to their message, especially men, for elected family court judge roles. I wonder if it is the case that lower performers in law school go into family law, and the high performers tend to be male and go into higher paying legal professions. Feminists may be drawn to family law to do their idea of SJW activity. Pro-family conservatives may find becoming divorce lawyers distasteful, also, so I wonder if this causes family courts to lean too far left.

[Cornfed]

This has been apparent for at least 25 years. And no, we do not need to create training blah blab blah. We need to depose the regime and massacre the millions of traitors that sustain it. That is what it takes.

[redfeather]

I believe every guy should watch this video once per year.
Divorce Corp.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZTOT6DKfZ8

Ronald Reagan signed No Fault Divorce into law in 1972, and he later admitted it was the worst mistake of his political career.
After he signed No Fault Divorce in 1972 it opened the flood gates for women to start divorce raping their husband and children with some cry baby excuse irreconcilable differences divorce. More than 75% of the divorces today are filed by women. This is why I advise guys to look overseas for a gf or wife because it is impossible to form a lasting relationship now with an American woman because the family court system is 100% for women and 100% against men. I have been forced into our fubar'd family court system by a wife filing for divorce, and I will tell you..."you cannot out mean our family court system"...it is designed to punish you the man and reward her the woman. Please watch the Divorce Corp movie, and thank me later.

[Contrarian Expatriate]

This has been apparent for at least 25 years. And no, we do not need to create training blah blab blah. We need to depose the regime and massacre the millions of traitors that sustain it. That is what it takes.

Ease up on him Cornfed. While many of us have known about these rackets against men for decades, @MrMan was raised in a very religious environment and then moved overseas. He therefore lives his life having swallowed a gigantic blue pill so this is his first taste of the red pill reality. So it is understandable why these things are surprising for him.

[Moretorque]

From my reading BAR is British Accreditation Regency, which means we are a British colony. This is all made possible by the Kings bank - Federal Reserve .... Allow me to issue the currency and I care not who makes the laws....This is complete proof of this statement, attorneys are just stooges of the British empire.

[MrMan]

This has been apparent for at least 25 years. And no, we do not need to create training blah blab blah. We need to depose the regime and massacre the millions of traitors that sustain it. That is what it takes.

I did not say that this was something incredibly new. I pointed out that the author of this article for a left-wing publication made a good point. When the sources of information and propaganda against the injustice in the family courts is so full of extreme rhetoric, it undermines the cause.

I do not agree that violent revolution is the way to solve this. A violent revolution might change the status quo, but who knows what it would change it into. And do you have the army of soldiers at your back ready to lead the civil war for your cause? Does leading the army pay better than security guard or English teacher work?

There need to be some calm-sounding voices on this subject that have toned-down rhetoric. MGTOWs complaining about the evils of women, and men like yourself calling for violent revolution aren't going to help much within the current system we are in.

I am thinking of a PAC dedicated to changing the family court system. It could support family court judges who are 'conservative activists' if such a thing exists, who are opposed to injustice. It could target divorced men with information about judges or politicians who are in favor of fair treatment of men in the courts. It could find a few cases women whose husbands slapped them with these orders to get an advantage (or legitimately) and send carefully worded advertisements to feminists to trick them into supporting state legislature candidates who are in favor of creating laws that protect parents against abuse of these types of orders in divorce cases.

[Cornfed]

This has been apparent for at least 25 years. And no, we do not need to create training blah blab blah. We need to depose the regime and massacre the millions of traitors that sustain it. That is what it takes.

I did not say that this was something incredibly new. I pointed out that the author of this article for a left-wing publication made a good point. When the sources of information and propaganda against the injustice in the family courts is so full of extreme rhetoric, it undermines the cause.

You think sadistic criminals will stop committing their horrendous crimes if people ask them nicely? WTF? MRAs have been going at it for more than a century with nothing to show for it. The lesson is that nothing of value can be achieved if females are allowed to vote or have any political influence. Men need to get a pair, depose the ZOG, execute all the traitors perpetrating its crimes and then permanently disempower females. If men don’t do that, Muslims or other invading barbarians will do it for them but most likely only after killing them all. Case closed, the end.

[Cornfed]

From my reading BAR is British Accreditation Regency, which means we are a British colony.

I'm pretty sure the reason the shyster society is called the Bar Association or whatever is that it is named after the Temple Bar Association in London. That was so named because its meetings were held near to a roadblock near some temple between the City of London (which you appear to be familiar with) and Greater London. But your general point is equally valid.

[Moretorque]

It's hard to pin down, the con relies on as much stealth as possible... Either way it is obvious the CITI has been running things by being the hub of the credit monoploy...

[MrMan]

This has been apparent for at least 25 years. And no, we do not need to create training blah blab blah. We need to depose the regime and massacre the millions of traitors that sustain it. That is what it takes.

I did not say that this was something incredibly new. I pointed out that the author of this article for a left-wing publication made a good point. When the sources of information and propaganda against the injustice in the family courts is so full of extreme rhetoric, it undermines the cause.

You think sadistic criminals will stop committing their horrendous crimes if people ask them nicely? WTF?

No, I'm saying extreme rhetoric might repell people who might otherwise be supporters of your cause.

MRAs have been going at it for more than a century with nothing to show for it.

I know feminists go way back in time and try to paint women in various social movements as 'feminists.' Who do you count as an MRAs before the feminist movement in the '60's or no-fault divorce in the 1970's? Men who opposed universal sufferage?

The lesson is that nothing of value can be achieved if females are allowed to vote or have any political influence.

If there is a revolution and a dictatorship or monarchy with a different philosophy of government tkaes over, that might happen. I don't know if this is truly possible within a republican system that gives women the vote.

Men need to get a pair, depose the ZOG,

Depose the ZOG? And what else, depost big foot and germ theory conspirators? Jews have some diverse political objectives depending on whether they are liberal and conservative, just like whites. Liberal Hollywood cultural ethnic Jews make money exploiting sex in film. Conservative Jews are opposed to that.

execute all the traitors perpetrating its crimes and then permanently disempower females. If men don’t do that, Muslims or other invading barbarians will do it for them but most likely only after killing them all. Case closed, the end.

Europe may be overrun by Muslims. The USA is more likely to become another Latino culture.