Stolen childhoods and blighted lives – child abuse in industrial schools

We have an ignoble history, generations of Irish boys and girls endured the horrors of a devils pact bewteen Church and State – there are those in our country who are still living with the horror of what was done do them.
As a nation – there are many conversations we still need to have – painful conversations – we need to face our past, honestly, truthfully and without flinching, otherwise our future will be forever blighted in more ways than one.

Survivor's Who Stand Together

Stolen childhoods and blighted lives – child abuse in industrial schools

The abuse detailed in the report by the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse was described by Enda Kenny as 'torture, pure and simple'.
The abuse detailed in the report by the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse was described by Enda Kenny as ‘torture, pure and simple’.

In the course of compiling her book, ‘Stolen Lives’, Bette Brown has come to believe that the abuse of children in industrial schools was one of the darkest chapters in Ireland’s history.

TOWER BRIDGE stands majestically in the morning sunlight above the Saturday strollers. Among them, Mary Collins is admiring the scene in the city of London that she now calls home but her peace is fleeting.

Fear suddenly seizes her like a physical grip on the back of her head and she is a little girl again, running with her mother through…

View original post 1,518 more words

Amen.ie Launch New Campaign to Highlight Domestic Abuse Against Men in Ireland

 

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Amen-Support-Services/546600098743428

 

Of all the issues faced by Irish men – the most hidden and least acknowledged is being the victim of a violent and abusive partner – even by men themselves today amen.ie launched it’s campaign to bring this hidden trauma to the public consciousness.

“Amen, the Navan-based voluntary group which provides support to male victims of domestic violence, has come across some extreme cases involving men who have been hit, kicked, slapped, stabbed with scissors or had boiling water thrown at them.

 Another problem is a widespread contemptuous or dismissive attitude to male victims of domestic violence. Niamh Farrell, manager at Amen, says: “We’ve had a regular flow of men coming in to talk about physical abuse. They feel they can’t report it because they don’t think they’ll be believed — women hitting men is not taken that seriously.”

“It can take men a while to take it seriously themselves — they’ll often endure sustained abuse before they come forward and only come when things are really bad.

“Women don’t take it seriously — if Nigella Lawson had done that to her husband it probably would not have got the same coverage even though it would be equally as serious.”

http://www.amen.ie/Papers/12082013_domestic_abuse.htm

 

THE hidden agony of men whose abusive partners demand their wages and demean them with an ‘allowance of €20 to €30’ a week is revealed in a new report.

 They are among thousands of men seeking help for physical, emotional, psychological, financial and even sexual abuse perpetrated by their female partners or wives.

 Some are having to wear make-up to cover bruises and feel humiliated and demoralised, the annual report of Amen, the support service for men revealed.

 The organisation is reporting a strong demand for its services with more than 5,225 contacts last year, a rise of 18pc.

 These contacts include helpline calls, one-to-one meetings, court accompaniments, emails, text messages and letters.

 One in four men who is contacting the support service say they are being physically abused by their partner or wife. Three-quarters are suffering a combination of verbal, psychological and financial abuse. And about 1pc of men who are seeking help are being sexually abused by their partners, according to the figures.

 “Many men have expressed that they ‘envy’ males who have physical scars because the scars from emotional or verbal and psychological abuse are far more damaging,” the report said.

 “The constant criticism and belittling have a long-lasting, damaging effect on a victim of domestic abuse,” it said.

 Since the service started in 1997, support staff have heard accounts from men who have experienced severe and at times life-threatening physical abuse.”

 

http://www.amen.ie/Papers/04092013_hidden_agony.htm

 

It is way past the time for feminists to shut the hell up about “violence against women” and time to start talking about violence BY WOMEN.

 

It is way past the time to start talking about violent PEOPLE – to start recognising that violent people are violent because that is how they are – NOT because they are male – or even because they are female – but because they are violent and abusive.

 

Our national TV station RTE ran a report earlier today about this launch on the news programme Six One News –  Report starts at 29.10 mins

 

http://www.rte.ie/player/ie/show/10289529/

 

 

Kristallnacht – Déjà Vue – Detroit – 2014

 

“Kristallnacht, literally, “Night of Crystal,” is often referred to as the “Night of Broken Glass.” The name refers to the wave of violent anti-Jewish pogroms which took place on November 9 and 10, 1938, throughout Germany, annexed Austria, and in areas of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia recently occupied by German troops.

Instigated primarily by Nazi Party officials and members of the SA (Sturmabteilungen: literally Assault Detachments, but commonly known as Storm Troopers) and Hitler Youth, Kristallnacht owes its name to the shards of shattered glass that lined German streets in the wake of the pogrom—broken glass from the windows of synagogues, homes, and Jewish-owned businesses plundered and destroyed during the violence.”

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005201

 

There is none more fundamental Human Right that the right to Freedom of Thought, Conscience, Belief and Speech – but this basic Human Right encompasses more than just this.

“Freedom of speech, of the press, of association, of assembly and petition — this set of guarantees, protected by the First Amendment, comprises what we refer to as freedom of expression. The Supreme Court has written that this freedom is

the matrix, the indispensable condition of nearly every other form of freedom.” Without it, other fundamental rights, like the right to vote, would wither and die.”

https://www.aclu.org/free-speech

 

Instigating, calling for, threatening, or perpetrating violence against those who do not believe what you believe, who do not agree with your opinion, who do not think the way you think – is akin to the progrom that the Nazis perpetrated against the Jews – and Kristallnacht was the first salvo in what became one the most horrific murderous periods of genocide in human history – and it began with broken glass.

Feminists have now embarked on preparations for another Kristallnacht – 76 years after that first Kristallnacht – because they do not believe that anyone has the right to believe, think or articulate anything other than what they believe, think or articulate.

Feminists are the new Nazis.

As a free citizen of the Republic of Ireland I declare that in my opinion feminism is a hate movement, a terrorist organisation and is akin to Nazism.

That anyone who collaborates with, supports, endorses or stands idly by and refuses to condemn feminism in all its manifestations, roots and branches is equally culpable, equally complicit is supporting a terrorist organisation, a hate movement and an ideology that has no other comparison other than to Nazism.

On June 26 – 29 2014 A Voice for Men (AVfM) intends to hold an International Conference on Men’s Rights in Detroit – the hotel at which this conference is being hosted has been in contact with Paul Elam owner and publisher of AVfM to make him aware that serious threats of violence, and of death threats have been made against not just conference attendees but the hotel, its staff and other guests.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/a-voice-for-men/threats-of-violence-and-death-against-doubletree-hilton-in-detroit-over-mens-conference/

http://www.avoiceformen.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/05/AVFM-Security-Letter-REDACTED.pdf

From a reading of the communication sent to Paul Elam from the hotel – two things are clear – the hotel is taking these threats seriously, and the hotel also expects the conference organisers to pay for the protection of the hotel, its staff, its guests and conference attendees.  Including attendees from other sovereign states – we’ll get back to this shortly, and anyone who just happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Against terrorists.

Except – the issuing of credible threats is a Federal Criminal Offence in the US – it is a crime.

“b)Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, or corporation, any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(c)Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

(d)Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, or corporation, any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to injure the property or reputation of the addressee or of another or the reputation of a deceased person or any threat to accuse the addressee or any other person of a crime, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”

Source

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 741; Pub. L. 99–646, § 63,Nov. 10, 1986, 100 Stat. 3614; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(G), (H), (K),Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/875

See also

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/876?qt-us_code_tabs=0#qt-us_code_tabs

 

18 U.S.C. § 875(c) states: “Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any   communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.” From the wording of § 875(c) it is clear that the legislator did not require the element of ‘intent.’ Thus, it is irrelevant if the accused claims he/she did not have the intent to produce any injury on the victim; the mere act of sending the e-mail with threatening messages typifies the criminal conduct.

The holding in United States v. DeAndino, 958 F.2d 146 (US Ct. App. 6th Cir. 1992) confirms this statement. In DeAndino, the court held: “A criminal statute such as 18 U.S.C.S. § 875(c) does not contain a specific mens rea element. However, such a statute is not presumed to create a strict liability offense, because mere omission from the statute of any mention of intent will not be construed as eliminating that element from the crime denounced.”

In other words, ‘federal stalking,’ as this crime is also known, is not a strict liability crime but it does require prosecutors to prove that the accused committed the offense. Thus, the ‘wording’ of the e-mails and the e-mails themselves are critical evidence in these cases.

Threats of injury must be found in the e-mails sent by the accused. As the Court held in DeAndino, the words in the [e-mail] message must fully, directly, and expressly set the elements of the statutory offense.

For instance, in Tuason, the wording of one of his e-mails said: “Mulatto kids are ugly freaks that should be destroyed. . . The blackie should be castrated. I want people in public malls, photo shoots, TV studios, radio, concerts, arenas, restaurants, NBC TV, Bravo TV, parties, sidewalks, etc. to stare and stab dead any blackie with a white girl like “SS”. . . If not, I “HK” WILL BOMB THE PLACE.” These words are a clear example of threatening words of injury under the federal statute.

Many other US circuit courts have followed this interpretation in DeAndino. For instance, the First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth circuit courts have followed this interpretation of 18 U.S.C. § 875(c) as not requiring specific mens rea (mental state of intent).

DeAndino held that this crime requires three specific elements: (i) there must be a transmission in interstate commerce; (ii) there must be a communication containing the threat; (iii) and the threat must be a threat to injure the person of another.

Therefore, according to 18 U.S.C. § 875(c) sending e-mails with words threatening injury is a federal crime and can be easily proven by showing that it was sent to a person in other state, showing the e-mail, and the wording the e-mail contains.

Thus, individuals prompt to explosive reactions should be cautions when wording their e-mail messages. A simple ‘mistake’ in wording e-mails threatening its recipient with an injury, even if not intended, may typify a federal crime with a harsh imprisonment sentence.”

 

http://www.ibls.com/internet_law_news_portal_view.aspx?id=2064&s=latestnews

 

The communication from the hotel makes reference to “calls” and “other threats” would it be beyond the realms of possibility that these threats were also issued via email, and/or online?

The hotel suggests that AVfM pays for extra police officers in order to protect, the hotel, its staff, its guests and conference attendees. From terrorists, and to take out insurance – against terrorist threats.

I have some questions – is the FBI involved? Are Detroit police investigating these criminal acts?

Again from reading the communication sent to Paul Elam from the hotel – these threats are being made against not just actual attendees of this conference – but hotel staff, hotel guests NOT attending this conference and one presumes any other person who might happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Again – I ask –  is the Federal Bureau of Investigation  involved in what appears to be credible threats of violence and credible death threats?

Back to citizens of other sovereign states who may either be attending this conference or just happen to be guests of this hotel at the same time.

Will the US State Department now be issuing warnings to citizens of other sovereign states intending to visit the United States of America that they do so at their own peril – recommend that visitors bring full body armour and take out either private insurance or hire private security personnel to accompany them on their visit to the United States of America – “Land of the Free, home of the brave” because apparently now, one only gets state police protection and Federal protection against threats of violence, and death threats from feminists, if one pays – the police force.

I recommend that citizens of other sovereign states intending to visit the United States of America, contact their embassies and Foreign Affairs Departments to make formal complaints to the government of the United States of America that threats of violence, and death threats against either US citizens or citizens of other sovereign states are tolerated in the United States of America – if they are made by feminists.

Apparently the targets of these threats of violence or death are irrelevant – whether attendees at a conference, staff of hotels or any other guests who just happen to be there.

So, what is it that the feminists who have issued these threats are “objecting” to? Not by disagreeing, not by legitimately protesting under legally sanctioned “freedom of association” – but by issuing death threats and threats of violence – not just against conference attendees, but the hotel, its staff, its guests, citizens of other sovereign states and any other person who – as I said – happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Because they do NOT uphold or believe in that most basic of all fundamental Human Rights.

Freedom of Speech, thought, conscience and belief.

 

Many people have written about this fundamental Human Right – the prophetic George Orwell

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”

George Orwell

Apparently in the United States of America – the home of “Liberty” if feminists don’t like what they hear – they will threaten violence and death against those saying those things they don’t want to hear – so that nobody else gets to hear them either – this would be in pursuit of “equal rights” no doubt?

Several US presidents have also addressed the issue of Freedom of Speech.

“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”

George Washington

It would appear that George Washington knew what he was talking about with regard to “slaughter” as feminists appear to believe that killing those with whom you disagree with is a legitimate way to advocate for “equal rights”

“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.”

[Special Message to the Congress on the Internal Security of the United States, August 8, 1950]”

Harry S. Truman

Mr. Truman was prescient – “a country where everyone lives in fear.” From feminists – who will perpetrate violence or fatal injury upon anyone who “disagrees” with them.

How about one of the famous Americans of all time?

“Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.”

Benjamin Franklin, Silence Dogood, The Busy-Body, and Early Writings

Did I mention that America prides itself on being the bastion of Liberty and Freedom and Democracy?

“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us.”

[The One Un-American Act, Speech to the Author’s Guild Council in New York, on receiving the 1951 Lauterbach Award (December 3, 1952)]”

William O. Douglas

Our own inimitable Oscar had something to say about Freedom of Speech.

“I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an ass of yourself.”

Oscar Wilde

A twist on that most famous of all quotes about Freedom of Speech.

“I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”

Voltaire

Though from the feminist perspective that should read “if I don’t agree with what you say – I will visit death and violence upon you – so that you don’t get to say what I disagree with”

 

The last word goes to Christopher Hitchens.

“My own opinion is enough for me, and I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, any time. And anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.”

Christopher Hitchens

I would like to add this – for any feminist attempting to pull the NAFALT – (Not All Feminists Are Like That) card – let me say this – ALL feminism is like that – if you subscribe to, endorse, support or turn a blind eye to the toxic roots, murderous and criminal behaviour of ANY section, part, branch of form of feminism – you ARE like that.

And you can kiss my Irish arse.

 

All quotes from – http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/freedom-of-speech

 

For those who think “this has nothing to do with me, am not either a feminist or a MRA/MHRA – storm in a teacup” – then bear this mind.

Martin Niemöller (1892-1984) was a prominent Protestant pastor who emerged as an outspoken public foe of Adolf Hitler and spent the last seven years of Nazi rule in concentration camps.

Niemöller is perhaps best remembered for the quotation:

 

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me–and there was no one left to speak for me.”

 

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007392

 

You don’t have to be a feminist or a MRA/MHRA or any other designation to believe in the sanctity of Human Rights – hell you don’t even have to like the human being whose rights you acknowledge as being sacrosanct – even the biggest arsehole on the planet has those Human Rights.

You don’t have to be anything but a Human Being to speak out against injustice, against prejudice, against hatred, against bigotry.

For those feminists caught in that toxic loop – “you must be a feminist” – I’m NOT a feminist – and hey look – my head didn’t explode – an asteroid didn’t hit the earth – the sun didn’t fall out of the sky.

I’m NOT a feminist and I believe 100% in the sanctity of Human Rights – you don’t you are a female supremacist – a supporter of thugs – of terrorists – unless you completely disavow and reject any tenet of feminism –  and you continue to stand idly by and say nothing about what YOUR movement deems a legitimate form of protest – threats of violence and death threats against those who also declare – I’m NOT a feminist.

Not speaking up – turning a blind eye makes you complicit.

These people claim to speak on your behalf – to be the voice of feminism – THIS is what your feminism is – in all its putrid toxic murderous and vile hate-filled glory. Your feminism.

There have been many many people whose beliefs were so deeply held they were worth dying for – YOURS apparently are worth killing for.

 

Edit – just got notification of this at change.org

“Its Time To Class Feminism As a Terrorist Group”

 

https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/the-government-its-time-to-class-feminism-as-a-terrorist-group

Money Makes the World Go Round………Not Ideology….Feminism is Just Along for the Ride

 

An odd title for an essay isn’t it? But bear with me – no-one can be in any doubt that feminism is a toxic ideology founded on hatred, prejudice and vitriol – well apart from feminists that is – but even the most supposedly academic feminists are morons – well, you would have to be some class of moron to believe even a tenth of the unutterable crap that feminists spew out and have spewed out.

But – here’s a thought – what if – feminism is merely a cover for something deeper, something less obvious – something that operates in the shadows – but in parallel with feminism?

What if – feminism is just the public face of something else?

 

This article appeared in Irish Independant yesterday.

Separated dad wants State to pay for house big enough for visiting children

Tim Healy– Updated 27 May 2014 10:40 PM

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/separated-dad-wants-state-to-pay-for-house-big-enough-for-visiting-children-30309135.html

I didn’t comment on it or immediately decide to sit down a write a critique because I wanted to wait to see if anyone commented – last time I checked and no – not one single comment.

The issues in this case – and it is the subject of an ongoing High Court case speak to Men’s Rights, men’s Human Rights – but there are deeper issues within which this case is embedded and which inform the underlying causes of why in this instance Men’s Human Rights are believed to be of such irrelevance that ignoring them is government policy to do so, that this government is impelled to implement policies that are blatantly and very obviously an infringement of this man’s Human Rights?

Those issues are cultural, political and economic – what this case is not about is feminism per se, this case is first and foremost about Human Rights – and the human being whose rights are being violated is male – and a parent, and to uphold his Human Rights would cost this government – money – and ultimately lots of money it simply is not willing or able to spend.

It is also about how the concept of family has become skewed – and this is where feminism comes in – this is the point where the influence of feminism intersects with politics and public policy, with societal and cultural attitudes – and most significantly with economic considerations.

Please read the article now and bear these things in mind – the issue is Human Rights – and the broader issue’s are about the cultural and political narrative and language used with regard to how Irish Society views not just men – but men as fathers – as parents. But it is also about economic policy. This is not necessarily simply because of feminism alone, though feminist influence has contributed to this – but also to how men and women see themselves – as parents, and how that paradigm has been always been assiduously cultivated.

Underpinning all this is the “Housing Crash” – and the devastating results of a housing bubble that when it burst here in Ireland almost brought this country to the brink of economic collapse – we are still living with the consequences of this – and will be living with those consequences for many many years to come.

Was this precipitated by feminism? If only. This was precipitated by greed, by political cute hoorism, by the machinations of venal and corrupt bankers, developers, and financiers.

So, let’s take a look at this article.

The first thing to note is the title of this article – in particular the implication that this man’s children “visit” him – that as a “separated dad” his role in his children’s lives is peripheral and that his connection to his children is not that of a parent with all the rights and responsibilities that this entails but of a single person who happens to have fathered some children.

The constant reference to access, to “visits” from his children is to my mind grating – and it gives me no pleasure to say this – but it isn’t just those in “authority” or sneery journalists who view fathers through this prism of fatherhood being viewed as a secondary type of parenting, as subsidiary to “motherhood” but some men do this as well.

Ok – having said that, granted the current legislative framework enshrines this perspective and operates it institutionally through mechanisms like concepts of “custody” of “access/contact/visitation” and of course “maintenance/child support”

My personal belief is that we need to move away from this narrative – which is inspired by and influenced by feminism – reject these concepts and embrace the over-arching concept of default equal parenting.

I am not suggesting that mothers and fathers are interchangeable – not at all – because they are not – but that within the context of parenting – mothers and fathers each bring unique and valuable things to the parenting of children.

This attitude is very clearly illustrated in the very title of this article, the attitude that fathers are secondary parents. The barely concealed contempt in the title of this article towards this man having the nerve to believe the state should pay his rent for a “bigger house” so his children could “visit” is palpable.

Though there would be no default perception that a mother seeking to avail of either Social Housing provision or Rent Supplement is somehow “not entitled” to do so.

In the body of the article reference is made to the amount of €900.00 – as if this amount would enable this man to live in the lap of luxury in a 6 bedroom mansion.

The reality is this.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/rents-continue-to-rise-especially-in-dublin-258278.html

Average rents in Dublin have been rising, and we are not talking about mansions here – just bog standard 2 or 3 bed houses or apartments

“Rents in Dublin City soared by more than 11% last year and average rents across the country climbed by 7% in the same period, according to a new report. 

The average advertised rent nationally is now €865, while in Dublin it is €1,210up 11.2% year on year.  

The quarterly Daft.ie rental report covering the last three months of 2013 signalled a warning that such increases in rent levels could adversely affect the country’s competitiveness.

Such was the increase in rental rates in Dublin that it is the fastest rate of inflation in the rental sector since the middle of 2007.

Rents are still 15% below the peak of the Celtic Tiger period in mid-2007, while around the country rental rates now are still more than 20% below those of mid-2007.”

The next thing is this.

http://www.welfare.ie/en/pressoffice/pdf/Revised%20rent%20limits%20June%202013.pdf

There are specific limits set on Rent Supplement – if a person is unable to provide housing from their own means – in Ireland there are two choices – make an application to one’s Local Authority for Social Housing – which this man has done and already been “deemed eligible” for.

“While he and his children have been deemed eligible for social housing, he has been told he will be on a waiting list for five years.”

 

Or try to find privately rented accommodation and apply for Rent Supplement – where, based on ones circumstances a sliding scale operates as to the amount that one can receive as a Rent Supplement.

If the same criteria was applied to his application for Rent Supplement as was applied in order to qualify him as a parent of four children for Social Housing he would be deemed eligible for a maximum amount of Rent Supplement of between €950.00 and €1,000.00 – depending on which area of Dublin he found accommodation in. For himself and his four children.

The last and final thing to note is this – there are NO Social Housing units available for the numbers in actualneed of this safety net, in fact the numbers on the Social Housing waiting lists has almost trebled since 2007.

 

“The social housing waiting list figures produced recently by the Housing Agency, showing almost 90,000 households in need, represent a 30 per cent increase since the start of the global financial crisis in 2007.

Since 2011, using updated methodology, housing need reduced by 9 per cent. However, if it had not been for vacancies that arose in the private landlord sector diluting the downturn, the demand for social housing might have been much higher, particularly in the capital and other cities and towns.”

 

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/social-housing-waiting-lists-indicate-that-new-phase-of-construction-is-now-needed-1.1648604

That 30% increase represents many different types of persons in need of Social Housing, top of the list would be “families” and family is now a much broader concept than it once was, with the majority of “families” being two parents and children, the next largest group of “families” would be single parents, or those who are parenting separately – as is clear from this man’s qualification of eligible for Social Housing – he is considered a “family” granted he is now on a housing list along with 89,999 other “households”.

So, why isn’t he considered a “family” from the perspective of the Department of the ironically named Social Protection?

MONEY!

The number of separated/divorced persons in Ireland according to the last Census in 2011 was, 203,964 in total – both male and female. I believe we can posit with some degree of accuracy that in quite a significant number of those cases it was the female half who retained possession of the “Family Home” and it was the male half who must find or secure “alternative accommodation” – being unable to do so can be a factor in decisions relating to custody/access, apart from any other factors – this man’s story is illustrative of that – even though it is quite clear from this article that there are NO issues relating to “access” or having “contact” with his children.

The issues in this case are political, economic and structural – though this article does have an underlying bias in its “tone” in particular, by characterising his need for housing because he wants somewhere for his children to “visit” him.

Back to the Census figures.

The total number of divorced/separated men in Ireland in 2011 was 88,918

Of that total – 38,412 are in rented accommodation and 50,497 (including not stated) are not.

 http://www.cso.ie/px/pxeirestat/Statire/SelectVarVal/saveselections.asp

 

The total number of divorced/separated women in Ireland in 2011 was 115,046

Of that total – 46,071 are in rented accommodation and 68, 975 are not.

 http://www.cso.ie/px/pxeirestat/Statire/SelectVarVal/saveselections.asp

These figures are for private rented accommodation.

The percentage of men in rented accommodation is just under 43% and the percentage of women in rented accommodation is a little over 40%

In essence almost parity – so one could posit that equal numbers of men and women are in the same boat, except for women there is a lifeboat, for men it is a leaky and capsizing rowboat.

Therein lies the problem – it is the “women and children first” into the lifeboats – and the men can die in the freezing cold waters of the Atlantic paradigm.

In relation to this particular set of circumstances there is an obvious paradox – between how two state bodies view this – on the one hand the Local Housing Authority deems this man is qualified for Social Housing – as a distinct “family” but on the other the Department of Social Protection (even typing that makes me grimace) is adamant that this man is “single” though legally he is not.

Consider this – if both parents were in need of Social Housing and if the “Family Home” is either already rented from a Local Authority or was privately rented whileavailing of Rent Supplement there is now a duplication of housing need – the Local Authority obviously has no problem incorporating this paradigm into its calculations and will now consider that both parents are equally eligible for Social Housing – granted the parent who leaves must now wait his/her turn on the housing list – which in this man’s case has been estimated at approx five years – but is prepared to accept that what was once, one “Family” or “Household” is now two – with the children being equally accepted as being part of each of those “Households”.

To reiterate, there is NO Social Housing available to accommodate the sheer numbers and this is a matter of economics, politics and as I stated above – the factors that went into causing the economic crash in the first place.

This is about money – this is about penny pinching, this is about putting economics before people – and finally this is about finding easy targets to implement these economic policies upon.

Separated fathers are easy targets – because of the default presumptions so clearly outlined and insinuated at in this article – fathers are visitors in their children’s lives – fathers are irrelevant to their children.

The Department of Social Protection rejected this man’s claim on the basis he was only entitled to the rate for a single person – if you look at the article you will see that this man separated in 2011 – even with stretching mathematical probability to its absolute limits – that he separated from his wife on the 1st January 2011 – neither he or his wife are eligible to apply for a divorce till the 2nd January 2015 – there is a 4 year qualifying period here in Ireland before you can apply – so – he is not legally “single” he is still legally “married” though separated.

Granted this is legal semantics and while a pertinent legal point – is not the crux of this matter.

The crux is how fathers are viewed – and in particular how separated fathers are viewed – as secondary parents – as persons who are “visited” by their children – from the Department of Social Protection’s perspective – the bottom line is money – saving money – eliminating as many people as possible from qualifying for any number of state supports or payments – separated fathers are easy targets.

It is that cynical.

Because even with the overlay of the influence of feminism on the perceptions and presumptions relating to parenting – and the role of both parents as being essential to the well-being of children – in a case like one – where there are clearly no issues of two parents being locked in a battle over the ownership of their mutual children – the state is actively and cynically creating a situation for economic reasons that imposes an additional handicap on separated fathers.

The ability to provide not just suitable accommodation for themselves – but for their children as well, and handing a potent weapon to those women who would gleefully and gladly use just such a weapon given half the chance.

This policy will actually reinforce and entrench the already difficult and painful experiences of fathers and will ultimately harm the children caught in the middle.

What or who could be in more need of “Social Protection” than children?

I did an ad hoc calculation on the figures and made a guess out of the numbers of men in rented accommodation that about a quarter of them would be in need of either Social Housing or Rent Supplement. Please bear in mind this is just a guess for illustrative purposes.

So we are looking at a figure of 9,603 separated or divorced men.

I calculated on the basis of these men having two children and that they were in the Dublin area.

Each one would qualify for a Rent Supplement of between €900.00 – €975.00 per month – an average of €937.50.

For a year this works out at €11,250.00 each.

In total for these 9,603 fathers it would cost €108,033,750.00 per year to pay them this Rent Supplement – so it does represent a hefty saving – on the surface.

How about this – at €100,000.00 a pop you could build 1080 houses in this country for that money – reducing the numbers to 8523, and the payout by €12,150,000.00 for the next year to €95,883,750.00

By the next year to €83,733,750.00 and the next to €71,583,750.00 – you get the picture.

Ok – let me just put all this into perspective – this state is paying 111 former ministers a total of €9.6 million a year in pensions.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/965m-annual-pensions-bill-for-former-ministers-213448.html

“As pay levels of top-earning bankers come under intense scrutiny, updated figures show taxpayers are also footing an annual €9.65m pensions bill for 111 former ministers.

 Figures supplied by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform reveal that 35 former senior politicians are paid combined ministerial and TD pensions worth over €100,000 gross each year.

 They include over a dozen members of Fianna Fáil-led governments during the past decade, governments which sanctioned large increases to politicians’ pay and pensions during their terms in office.

 A further 68 former office holders receive pensions worth in excess of €50,000. All former ministers will receive the combined pension for the rest of their lives.”

 

If those pension were reduced by 50% to €50,000.0 that would be €4.82 million and would fund Rent Supplement for approx 428 of those fathers.

But this will really concentrate your mind on how our political class views Irish people.

 

“The highest earners are two former taoisigh, Brian Cowen and Bertie Ahern, who are largely blamed for overseeing policies which led to the collapse of the economy. They are each entitled to a combined annual pension of €164,526 before tax. After deductions for the pension levy, the two former Fianna Fáil leaders will receive annual payments of €150,163. Both men are paying an effective public service pension levy rate of 9%.”

 

What about those bankers (spelt with a capital “W”)

 

Well last year some of those bankers were caught on tape laughing about how not only did they know about the impending crisis but also that they would never have to pay a single penny back – have a read.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/karlwhelan/2013/06/28/the-anglo-tapes-the-guarantee-and-irelands-economic-crisis/

 http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/06/29/bank-j29.html

We are talking about a sum of €7 Billion by the way.

Which brings me to my final point – remember I said that for the cost of paying out Rent Supplement for a year you could build 1080 houses at €100,000.00 a pop.

I know one way to fund the building of 5000 houses – straight away, at the same cost – for a total of €500,000,000.00 – or rather I know who should be forced to pay for this.

The ones who caused this crisis – every last one of them – like I said – bankers spelt with a capital “W” and politicians who shouldn’t have been allowed to run a stall never mind a country.

I began this essay by saying that money makes this world go round, not ideology – so to conclude – with regard to feminism – the motivating force behind feminism is to extract resources – to facilitate wealth transfers from men to women.

There is a purpose other than the obvious to this – women shop – women buy useless crap – in comparison to men – women literally do “shop till they drop” women are the main drivers behind consumerism.

I’m going to go out on a limb here and say this – feminism is a handy distraction from the underlying institutional and structural problems that are besetting almost all western states. It is still a toxic vile hate movement? Yes it is. Absolutely.

But if you look at some of the crap that mainstream feminists whine about – such as sexism – sorry, but who really gives a shit – it makes good TV for some idiot to go on a rant bout – will focus people’s attention on what are in essence trivial matters – and create a smokescreen of carefully hyped and manufactured hysteria over……………..nothing.

It is mass hysteria for the masses, for the hard of thinking.

Is it really the burning issue of the day that needs answering, that women are being “disrespected” are having their feelings hurt by not being taken seriously? Really? This is an issue worth addressing – on TV?

This planet is being driven to the brink of self-destruction – almost all western states are literally teetering on the brink of economic collapse – are men being systematically stripped of their Human Rights at the behest of feminists? Yep – they sure are.

The question is why? Cui Bono? Who benefits? Who are the ultimate beneficiaries of this? Women?

The answers are a damn sight more complex than “women’s rights” or “men’s rights” even – right now the west is almost stripped bare of resources – how does one destabilise a culture or a society in order to have a free hand to go in and like a plague of locusts strip that culture or society of its resources?

One destabilises the very foundations upon which all societies and cultures are based – the family, and kinship groups – one pits men and women against one another – creates a toxic social environment that will, to all intents and purposes create carefully controlled social unrest – and yep – even fund “services” exclusively for women – and engineer a neutered male population, and a disenfranchised male population is a docile male population.

Because here is the other thing – women vote – and in greater numbers than men – and women vote for stupid reasons – you flatter the average female enough – appeal to her sense of inherent entitlement and pander to her need to see herself as “special” and that dumb bint would vote for Atilla the Hun.

And if you can also convince enough men that this is actually a good thing – then you are laughing – all the way to the bank.

Feminism’s purpose is and was to implement a programme of male neutering – to implement a programme where men were literally stripped of the right to organise, to co-operate, to form cohesive groups and to embroil them is a positive shitstorm of social exclusion, social and cultural demonization and render them ineffective as a potential threat to the implementation of economic warfare.

 

This story is about this one man’s battle to have his Human Rights vindicated but it is also a symptom – yes it is a story of men’s rights – of father’s rights – and it must be said of children’s rights – but it also gives us a peek at the dark murky waters that flow beneath – at the underlying structural causes.

The Department of Social Protection in Ireland has a programme of welfare cuts to implement – it has to reduce the Social Welfare bill – this is not one of those “will we or wont we” things – this is one of those “do it or else things.

The reasons for this austerity programme are well documented and speak to not just economic policy failures but political failures.

But – the bottom line is this – cuts must be made and made they will be – now – who can we pick on? Who does nobody give a shit about? Who are the easy targets?

How did men find themselves in the position of being those easy targets – and more importantly why?

 

Cui bono? Who benefits?

 

We Just Want World Peace and to Save the Planet…….and……..to help old ladies across the road!!

 

I’m going to write about eco-feminism, but am going to preface it with – I know sod all about eco-feminism – or at least I didn’t until now – and what little I know now, is giving me a headache.

As soon as I see the words “goddess” and “women” and “nurturing” and “patriarchy” together I switch off, and if the words “crystals” or “healing” or “spirituality” are thrown into the mix – then I find something to watch or read that restores my sanity – Bill Burr is good for that.

Bearing in mind the sheer volume of feminist shit I’ve read in the last several months I actually believed there was nothing that could surprise me regarding the depths of stupidity, irrationality or insanity that feminists inhabit.

I was wrong.

I give you first an article in the Irish times by one Joe Humphreys called:

Tired of capitalism? Try ecofeminism; Economies undervalue ‘women’s work’ – but are men to blame?

http://www.irishtimes.com/culture/tired-of-capitalism-try-ecofeminism-1.1772914

And an “explanation” of what eco-feminism is here. Apparently;

http://www.thegreenfuse.org/ecofem.htm

“There is no single definition of ecofeminism, and ecofeminists may well disagree with at least some of explanations I give in this section, but there are core principles. Ecofeminists agree that the domination of women and the domination of nature are fundamentally connected and that environmental efforts are therefore integral with work to overcome the oppression of women.

 The primary aims of ecofeminism are not the same as those typically associated with liberal feminism. Ecofeminists do not seek equality with men as such, but aim for a liberation of women as women. Central to this liberation is a recognition of the value of the activities traditionally associated with women; childbirth, nurturing and the whole domestic arena. Some feminists have criticized ecofeminism for reinforcing oppressive stereotypes and for its tendency toward essentialism.”

 

I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that trees are probably all oppressive and patriarchal while shrubs are probably not 🙂

Though – while I sympathise with these greenfems and their inability to find a suitable single definition for this “branch” of feminism – a suggestion for a single definition – it begins with bull and ends with shit. You’re welcome 🙂
Ok – there is a story behind how I found myself reading this garbage – have been pondering on what feminists will do now that the writing is starting to appear on the wall for, in your face man hating toxic gender feminists.

Feminism is nothing if not chameleon like – or perhaps snakelike would be a better description – shed one skin and emerge with a brand new outer casing.

The other thing is this – we’ve just had some elections here in Ireland, both local and European, and the Greens who were literally wiped out in the last general election are having a bit of a new lease of life – and the final thing – lot of talk in Ireland about creating a “sustainable economy” and embracing the green environmentally friendly new wave of selling useless overpriced shit to people. But that’s environmentally friendly.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/elections/resurgent-greens-tweet-warning-to-labour-1.1808372

This is what caught my eye;

“Despite their demolition as a parliamentary force in the Republic, the Greens have connections in an international movement. Swedish and German Greens have rebuilt at various points after electoral setbacks. The electoral fate that befall the Irish Greens in 2011, although traumatic for its members, was not unusual. The electorate can be forgiving.”

Why do the hairs on the back of my neck always stand up when I see the word Swedish or Sweden connected to anything?

Young people are also more into “the environment” and “saving the planet” than more mature folks, and last but not least, all the pioneers of third wave feminism are getting old, crotchety, even more insane than they were when they started out, and the oppression message is just getting old.

Feminism needs new blood – with a better way to sell the message.

The new wave of online feminism is populated by complete morons and idiots or nasty arseholes like Amanda Marcotte and the jezzies – feminism needs a new hook – and what better one than saving the planet…….from patriarchal trees or some such shoite.

Does this mean that feminism will be taking a new direction? Hell no – the toxic message is the same – but the packaging, the skin is getting frayed around the edges – the wrinkles are starting to show.

What could be more plausible than blaming the patriarchy for the all the environmental woes of the planet?

It is no coincidence that these greemfems and various other loony tunes dancing round naked by the light of the moon, refer to the planet as Gaia – Mother Earth, or that menstruation is somehow viewed as a cosmic lunar link to the rhythms of all life – sigh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_(mythology)

So, what about this article in the Irish Times? Weeeeeeeeeeeeeelll, there’s this;

“As Mary Mellor, emeritus professor in sociology at Northumbria University, explains, ecofeminism has been around since the 1970s. There is a recent revival of interest, and Mellor – who was in Dublin this week delivering the annual guest lecture of the UCD School of Social Justice – has injected her own critique of the “gender-based economy” and its figurehead, “Economic Man”.

 What is needed, she says, is for women’s work to be properly accounted for, but also to be remunerated through a “public money” system that is managed by the state rather than by the banks. Mellor’s idea is summarised thus: “Economic Man claims a false transcendence of ‘his’ existence in nature.”

 

Then, there is this;

 

“What is ecofeminism?
 
Mary Mellor: “It’s the idea that there is a link between women and nature. But this can be construed in several different ways. Some people think of women as nurturing earth mothers with a kind of sympathetic awareness of nature that men don’t have. That’s not my position, but I can understand where people are coming from. A lot of the early ecofeminists were poets and theologians. They were already in that sort of romantic and spiritual field.

 “I see it in much more material terms, and the way in which there is no economic accounting either for the damage to the natural world or for what I call ‘women’s work’ – work around the body and in the community that sustains us in our lives.

 “The concept of ‘economic man’, this kind of rational agent, couldn’t exist – and, of course, doesn’t exist, because it’s a construct – without all the work that is done under the title ‘women’s work’, and the work of the environment in sustaining and dealing with the damage that our human activities do.”

 

Oh holy shit!

 

That was my reaction – in a nutshell – anything that has “feminism” in any part of its title is bad news – anything – and this piece of drivel was in the paper of record here in Ireland – and to be blunt – the vast majority of women are waking up to what a less than positive label feminist is – it just doesn’t get them what they want. Needless to say, Joe Humphreys is socialist/marxist/idiot – pick one, and this Mary Mellor is…….well if you read her contributions you’ll see what she is.

Even the “I’m not a feminist but…….” types are running out of road with the whole equal rights for women crap.

But – saving the planet? Now there’s a message you can get behind, manipulate, twist, mould and use to act as a cover for your toxic agenda. Who doesn’t realise that we have some major environmental issues looming if not already upon us – and who wouldn’t get onboard with saving the planet?

Granted – for the really hardcore gender feminists – the man hating rancid harpy’s, nothing will change – the agenda is always going to be female supremacy – but – they have to package and sell that shit to the masses – they have to peddle their snake oil in fancy bottles to disguise the taste.

Undoing the deeply embedded toxic agenda of feminism from the intuitional framework of states is going to be hard enough, reversing the cultural and social paradigms that inform and give license to dysfunctional if not downright criminal behaviour and actions on the part of women is another – but – keeping an eye on the shapeshifting and reworking of the vehicles through which feminism operates is also worth doing – in my opinion.

What next? Vegetarian feminism? Carrots are symbols of patriarchal oppression!

Now, for all those eco feminists smugly preening themselves about how in tune with nature and the environment they are – here are a few insights for you.

 

Water Pollution Caused by Birth Control Poses Dilemma – Wynne Parry, LiveScience Senior Writer   May 23, 2012 02:00pm ET

http://www.livescience.com/20532-birth-control-water-pollution.html

 

What was that you were saying about women being close to nature – in tune with nature? Hmmm.

Regrets? I Have a Few…….

 

Am sure everyone – well anyone as old as me – remembers that classic song by the inimitable Francis Albert “Frank” Sinatra, “My Way” and for those who are now rolling their eyes up to heaven, here it is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePs6bHsQx6A

The lyrics here

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/franksinatra/myway.html

So you can sing along 🙂

“My Way”

And now, the end is here

And so I face the final curtain

My friend, I’ll say it clear

I’ll state my case, of which I’m certain

I’ve lived a life that’s full

I traveled each and ev’ry highway

And more, much more than this, I did it my way

 

Regrets, I’ve had a few

But then again, too few to mention

I did what I had to do and saw it through without exemption

I planned each charted course, each careful step along the byway

And more, much more than this, I did it my way

 

Yes, there were times, I’m sure you knew

When I bit off more than I could chew

But through it all, when there was doubt

I ate it up and spit it out

I faced it all and I stood tall and did it my way

 

I’ve loved, I’ve laughed and cried

I’ve had my fill, my share of losing

And now, as tears subside, I find it all so amusing

To think I did all that

And may I say, not in a shy way,

“Oh, no, oh, no, not me, I did it my way”

 

For what is a man, what has he got?

If not himself, then he has naught

To say the things he truly feels and not the words of one who kneels

The record shows I took the blows and did it my way!

[instrumental] 

Yes, it was my way

The link to the article that GOM (Grumpy Old Man) posted on the “Edge of The Cliff” essay in his reply (that I will get to shortly) triggered a memory – a memory of a funeral – no – this is not a sad morbid post – this is a memory of a woman who’s life deserved to be celebrated.

http://topinfopost.com/2014/05/12/top-5-regrets-people-make-on-their-deathbed

As the funeral ended and as the coffin bearing this extraordinary woman was carried out of the church – the priest announced that she had picked a song to be played as this was being done – that song was “My Way” by Frank Sinatra – it epitomised and encapsulated the type of human being she was – and in the midst of tears and grief an overwhelming feeling of gratitude and joy swept over me that I had had the extraordinary honour and privilege to have known her. She lived her life on her terms, at a time when doing so wasn’t exactly the “done thing” here in Ireland – was she a saint? Nope but she was someone who did it “My Way

With humour, with grace, with wit and with a sense of what could only be called style that was uniquely her own. She had “charisma” that indefinable something that many aspire to, but very few possess – she was a close friend of my mothers, and I was just beginning to become old enough to really appreciate her and transition from her friend’s daughter to being privileged to be counted as her friend in my own right when she passed away.

Odd isn’t it the connections that we make between things, or what triggers memories?

The article is about regrets also – about what people close to coming to the end almost always express as things they have regretted. Go read the article first and then come back to this – because this is a “thinking out loud” exercise on my part – a sort of personal take on how this article and that song have resonated with me – am more than cognisant that there are those who will view this cynically and do that “eye rolling thing” and you know what – I don’t care, go read something else.

In many ways I would consider myself to be a idealist, perhaps even a bit naive in that I believe that there are things we should be idealistic about, things we should aspire to other than material, superficial and temporal things – that human beings can and should strive for these, I suppose higher things – not everything has to be so clever, or so cynical, not everything has to be used as a vehicle for self aggrandisement, spite or “getting one up” on someone else, or even as I have begun to observe, displaying all the nastiest, most unscrupulous and egotistical characteristics that human beings possess.

Nor do I believe that people either should be dictated to, or disdained or vilified simply on the basis that they happen to NOT accept or subscribe to every single tenet of a majority (both spoken and unspoken – implied or otherwise) – of the actions or behaviours of every single person with whom they are supposed to, or expected to owe some kind of allegiance to.

From my personal perspective – I really really don’t give a shit what label you wear – whether in the eyes of any number of people, or for that matter in the eyes of that person themselves, that label is some kind of talisman, a magic shield that protects you – that you can wave it and claim immunity because of this label.

Nor do I believe that any one person is crucial to any movement – not unless that person is a William Wilberforce or a Nelson Mandela, a Martin Luther King or even a Bob Geldof those kinds of people are rare – ordinary people doing extraordinary things, and to be blunt so far, I personally haven’t encountered one of those. But I live in hope.

I do what I do because I want to – if I stopped, it wouldn’t make a blind bit of difference – in fact would actually make my life so much easier – for a start I wouldn’t have to deal with the crap I’m dealing with now – I could slip back into obscurity and my life would go on, and the MHRM movement would go on without a blip.

There are things I believe in, and things that I do not – the things I believe in are relatively simple and are encompassed by the overarching principles of Universal Human Rights – for ALL human beings – and as far I am concerned women are human beings – in fact even feminists are human beings.

Do I believe that what most feminists choose to believe is unutterable crap? Absolutely. Or that a lot of women have a warped and twisted and definitely over-estimated perspective of their “value” as human beings as opposed to the value as human beings of men? Again, absolutely.

All this “goddess” shit and “because I’m worth it” crap – sheesh!

Personally – I don’t subscribe to the view that “anything goes” either in real life or on the internet or for that matter within the MHRM or any other “movement” for that matter, including feminism – though I do acknowledge any persons – calling themselves and subscribing to the “beliefs” of feminism – RIGHT to believe whatever rubbish they like, and to express it. Whatever – believe the earth is flat for all care – believe that we are descended from an alien race that “seeded” this planet millennia ago and all this is one vast “project” I don’t – and will damn well express that opinion whether you like it or not, because like I said, believe whatever rubbish you like, so not the issue, but don’t get on your high horse and tell me what to believe!

So, onto the article.

The author lists the top five  regrets that those nearing the end most express. The first is:

1. I wish I’d had the courage to live a life true to myself, not the life others expected of me.

This was the most common regret of all. When people realise that their life is almost over and look back clearly on it, it is easy to see how many dreams have gone unfulfilled. Most people had not honoured even a half of their dreams and had to die knowing that it was due to choices they had made, or not made.

It is very important to try and honour at least some of your dreams along the way. From the moment that you lose your health, it is too late. Health brings a freedom very few realise, until they no longer have it.

 

This one resonated with me – over the course of my life I have lacked that courage from time to time – weighed up my dreams against what I thought I should do, against what I really wanted to do, or ought to do – let things go – or made choices that really weren’t being “true to myself” but I think lots of people do that – you live the life you believe you have – follow the path of least resistance. Not to say that compromise isn’t a valid option – it is – but there’s compromise and then there’s letting other people’s expectations dictate your actions. The whole “don’t rock the boat” thing – or the “but everybody else believes/thinks/feels like this

The second one is this:

2. I wish I didn’t work so hard.

This came from every male patient that I nursed. They missed their children’s youth and their partner’s companionship. Women also spoke of this regret. But as most were from an older generation, many of the female patients had not been breadwinners. All of the men I nursed deeply regretted spending so much of their lives on the treadmill of a work existence.

By simplifying your lifestyle and making conscious choices along the way, it is possible to not need the income that you think you do. And by creating more space in your life, you become happier and more open to new opportunities, ones more suited to your new lifestyle.

 

The author makes the point that this one is heard from every male patient she had (I’m presuming the author is female) and it speaks to the expectations placed upon men over the course of human history to be the providers, the protectors of their families – expectations that not just emanated from cultural and societal attitudes but from within the paradigm of male female relationships – a paradigm that is now being twisted and corrupted and hurled back at these men as a weapon to demonise them. Feminism. It could take the most positive and enriching thing and turn it into something toxic.

Number three is this one:

3. I wish I’d had the courage to express my feelings.

Many people suppressed their feelings in order to keep peace with others. As a result, they settled for a mediocre existence and never became who they were truly capable of becoming. Many developed illnesses relating to the bitterness and resentment they carried as a result.

We cannot control the reactions of others. However, although people may initially react when you change the way you are by speaking honestly, in the end it raises the relationship to a whole new and healthier level. Either that or it releases the unhealthy relationship from your life. Either way, you win.

 

This is the where the memory got triggered – and I went and listened to Frank  doing it “his way” I’ve read this part now about seven or eight times – had a bit of a sit on my doorstep – had a bit of a think and a ponder – and reflected on events in my life over the last 7/8 months, and a bit further back.

Having said that – as an individual I’ve never really had a problem “expressing my feelings” have I always expressed them in the most appropriate ways? Hell no……….tact and diplomacy were never my strong suit – and yes I know that I have hurt other people’s feelings as a result. But, I defy anyone to show me a person who hasn’t done that – someone is who so saintly that they have never just blurted something out, lost the plot, allowed external pressures or circumstances to dictate how they reacted to something?

Not excusing it – am simply saying – shit happens – and when shit happens – as human beings we don’t always behave in the absolute best way – I don’t – and though personally I’ve always had strong views, about things that I’ve had views about – they generally didn’t and even now don’t exactly align with the views of a lot of people.

It wasn’t long after I’d entered the world of the MHRM, that I realised there were simply some things I just didn’t agree with – that I personally did not and couldn’t subscribe to – so I found myself drifting over lines – modifying my personal beliefs, and not saying anything in order to “keep the peace with others” this has now resulted in me becoming disenchanted with certain elements within the MHRM, and to be honest to question the direction and motives of some elements – I look at some of the stuff I read and see – and I look at and read a lot – quite a bit of it is crap – or it is just simply taking the wrong tack – it is taking the almost exactly polarised position to feminism – all women are bad – all men are good. In my opinion. 🙂

This is simply not true – I see people posting poisonous comments and waving statistics around as if this was somehow proof positive that the MHRM was right and feminism was wrong.

When in actuality – Some women are bad, some women are good, some men are good some men are bad – and in between there are all sorts – both male and female.

For me there IS a third way – for example take DV – the consensus is this – mutual IPV hovers around the 42% mark – depending on which study you read – unidirectional IPV is almost equally divided between men and women.

This means in effect, that of the around 23% of ALL persons who engage in these kinds of behaviour – HALF – as in almost EQUAL numbers – are male and HALF are females, and in their own individual ways, are horrible nasty violent and abusive shitheads, EQUALLY.

Feminism ignores male victims and the MHRM ignores female victims – which in my mind makes both just as bad as one another.

BOTH “sides” use exactly the same tactics to demonise the other – by emphasising the GENDERED nature of each sides “case” when any reputable study or research will tell you – GENDER is the least important element of what contributes to violent abusive behaviour in HUMAN BEINGS.

Those are my opinions – and I realise that this appeals to neither feminists or the MHRM – but – that is exactly what I think – both sides are just as bad as one another – when the issue is about violent human beings – of any gender – and granted it is feminism that controls the narrative in this area – for now – but I personally don’t need to reference feminism in order to point out the facts – the facts speak for themselves – if as a result of that then feminism ends up with egg all over its face – so be it.

 

4. I wish I had stayed in touch with my friends.

Often they would not truly realise the full benefits of old friends until their dying weeks and it was not always possible to track them down. Many had become so caught up in their own lives that they had let golden friendships slip by over the years. There were many deep regrets about not giving friendships the time and effort that they deserved. Everyone misses their friends when they are dying.

It is common for anyone in a busy lifestyle to let friendships slip. But when you are faced with your approaching death, the physical details of life fall away. People do want to get their financial affairs in order if possible. But it is not money or status that holds the true importance for them. They want to get things in order more for the benefit of those they love. Usually though, they are too ill and weary to ever manage this task. It is all comes down to love and relationships in the end. That is all that remains in the final weeks, love and relationships.

 

This one caused me great sadness – I had a friend from school, a great friend – we got into all sorts of trouble together (nothing serious) – over the years we stayed in touch from time to time, then stuff would get in the way and we wouldn’t be in contact for ages – about three years ago – having known she lived not too far from me and having been saying to myself “I must drop down and say hello” – I did eventually – it had been playing on my mind for some time – so off I went – her husband opened the door and he had a very strange look when he saw me.

He told me that my friend had died about 6 months before, and that they had no way of getting in touch with me.

I’ve had to do a lot of grieving over the last three years – have lost four people who meant a lot to me – one in particular two years ago – I had lost touch with three of them – and that I deeply regret.

5. I wish that I had let myself be happier.

This is a surprisingly common one. Many did not realise until the end that happiness is a choice. They had stayed stuck in old patterns and habits. The so-called ‘comfort’ of familiarity overflowed into their emotions, as well as their physical lives. Fear of change had them pretending to others, and to their selves, that they were content. When deep within, they longed to laugh properly and have silliness in their life again.

When you are on your deathbed, what others think of you is a long way from your mind. How wonderful to be able to let go and smile again, long before you are dying.

Life is a choice. It is YOUR life. Choose consciously, choose wisely, choose honestly. Choose happiness

This one gave me some pause – “let myself be happier” then it struck me – no-one can make you happy – only doing things that you enjoy, you believe in, or that you want to do, makes you happy – living your life worrying about whether or not doing what makes you happy, makes other people happy is pointless – and I do agree with what she says here that “”Fear of change had them pretending to others, and to their selves, that they were content.” Now that does resonate – because it is living a life dictated by what others expect – and how they expect you to live your life.

There is of course a caveat to that – if what “makes you happy” is either hurtful or harmful to other people – or causes other people unhappiness then – nope.

Anyhoo back to Frank – so yes – for me “Regrets, I’ve had a few….but then again…too few to mention” what I have in fact done, is learnt something, I hope from every experience – both good and bad.

For anyone reading this who actually does know me in real life –THAT is the song I would like played at my funeral.

Then bury me on hillside in Connemara overlooking the sea. Thanks. 🙂

The Road Less Travelled………..

 

I’ve been doing a bit of spring-cleaning – sort of mental spring-cleaning – events over the last couple of months have literally shaken me to my very core. But then, we all have those periods in our lives where one finds oneself either being swept along by events or having events sweep over us and swamp us.

What has precipitated this mental spring-cleaning was this – one of my most valued and respected commenter’s, sent me a poem, a poem this person was not to know  has been one of personal favourites since school

I recall the first time I read it, or at the time was forced to read it, it resonated with me in a way, that to be honest poetry usually doesn’t, it is a rare poem that does that – but this one did, and as I said, has been a personal favourite for most of my life, and don’t worry am not going to go into an arty farty analysis of this poem.

 

The Road Not Taken – Robert Frost, 1874 – 1963

Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,

And sorry I could not travel both

And be one traveler, long I stood

And looked down one as far as I could

To where it bent in the undergrowth;

 

Then took the other, as just as fair,

And having perhaps the better claim,

Because it was grassy and wanted wear;

Though as for that the passing there

Had worn them really about the same,

 

And both that morning equally lay

In leaves no step had trodden black.

Oh, I kept the first for another day!

Yet knowing how way leads on to way,

I doubted if I should ever come back.

 

I shall be telling this with a sigh

Somewhere ages and ages hence:

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I–

I took the one less traveled by,

And that has made all the difference.

 

https://www.poets.org/poetsorg/poem/road-not-taken

Anyway back to the mental spring cleaning – I took a road some seven months ago when I started this blog, but up until then I was content to comment on other sites, most particularly on AVfM. My goal at that time was to continue to do that (comment) and continue to research a book that had been percolating in my head for about five years.

Between then and now, several things have happened that looking back I should have given more thought to, should have taken more time to reflect on – had I done so – perhaps I would not be writing what I am writing now. Having said that, I have learned things, some good, some not so good and some that I am still trying to process and figure out.

One of the steps on that path I took was when I made the decision to “go public” eventually, with a friend, a real life friend that is, and a fellow member of MRI (Men’s Rights Ireland) we did a “pros and cons” thing – having spent some time around the internet – a lot more than I had ever previously – I already knew that, to be blunt, it had its good, its bad and its downright nasty.

I have over the last 7/8 months encountered almost equal proportions of all of those types, and sometimes discovered that it is difficult to tell them apart. But, it is like that in real life too isn’t it?

One of the most unfortunate things that I have personally have learnt is that even within the so called MHRM – there are those who relish and seem to thrive on being as nasty, and as unscrupulous as the avowed enemies of the MHRM – feminists.

To say I am disenchanted with the MHRM would be an understatement – does that mean that I have “gone over to the other side?” absolutely not – if by that is meant, am I becoming a feminist?

Absolutely not – hell will freeze over before that happens – have never been a feminist and will never be a feminist. Ever.

But while I am sick to death of reading the drivel that spews out of the mouths and keyboards of feminists from the most moronic to the supposedly most academic (sigh) I am almost as equally sick to death reading the almost equally moronic, equally angry rants, vitriol speckled and hate filled spewings of some MRA/MHRA’s.

And yes I know I also post “rants” and also “go after” feminists and most recently a MRA/MHRA “group” – and by the way I stand by every word I wrote. Will get back to that another time.

There are individuals I admire enormously, who post and write under the amorphous banner of the MHRM – but do so as individuals, which I personally prefer, never been a “joiner” each to their own!

Have I suddenly woken up and embraced the NAWALT mantra either? Nope – unfortunately a vast majority of women ARE like that – with that being a major part of why our societies and cultures are in the mess they are now.

But I also know something – that it is the cultural and societal context that prevails in various different societies and the over-arching framework of legislative and political “norms” that allows those women who are “like that” to belike that” and that this does not apply with either equal influence or equal force, or in the same ways, in every single culture.

Ireland is a case in point – a very particular case in point – we have in this country so many layers of interwoven and interconnected “issues” balanced against the backdrop of our equally unique history that citing feminism as the only cause is both wilfully ignorant and deliberately disingenuous, and runs the risk of failing to address to major issues that beset and have beset this country in an attempt to point a finger at a handy “enemy” letting other equally culpable “enemies” slid quietly off the hook and disappear in a fog of populist rhetoric, rabble rousing polemics, and ill-informed badly researched, sloppily put together, self aggrandising soapboxing “articles”

I love this country, I cannot imagine living anywhere else, I wouldn’t live anywhere else, in spite of all its faults and failing, innumerable problems, serious social cultural and political issues that at times seem insurmountable I love my country. While I have encountered some right eejits and gobshoites of both sexes, in general Irish people (other than feminist academic ones that is) are good people.

Not perfect people, not saints, not angels – just people – both male and female – is it getting rarer and rarer to find good women? Yes it is – but they are to be found, just as there are some Irish men that you wouldn’t piss on if they were on fire. With the caveat that any feminist is by default a total wretch.

When I started this – taking this path into the world of the MHRM – my original focus was on two things – exposing the vile toxic roots of feminism and how it had spread from its original source(s) in both the US and the UK – mostly – and had begun to infect all other parts of the western hemisphere, including to some extent Ireland, and advocating for changes within Ireland to public policy, legislation, and cultural and social attitudes that were and are undermining the Human Rights, in specific areas, of Irish men.

That’s it – that was my goal. But, I got distracted. I allowed myself to get swept along a different path. I allowed things that were not good, not positive to become part of my “agenda” for want of a better word.

Am I indebted to many individuals who have inspired me, giving me insight into perspectives that I hadn’t considered before? Absolutely, and off the top of my head Robert St Estephe, Angryharry, Fidelbogan, Janet Bloomfield, Alison Tieman, the guys at Gynocentrism, John Hembling, Diana Davison spring to mind.

But, my focus was, at the start my own backyard – Ireland – and that is where I intend to primarily focus on from now on, both on this blog and on MRI (Men’s Rights Ireland) from different perspectives of course. Do I wish all those dedicated individuals in various different countries all over this world my very best in their own struggles against the toxic influences of feminism in their particular backyards and on their particular battlegrounds? With all my heart.

In many ways your struggles are greater, your “enemy” is more deeply entrenched and determined, and you have many more years of this malign infection to root out and consign to the garbage can of history – hopefully never to be allowed to take root again.

My fear is that, while in many respects Ireland has escaped the full force of feminist influence, not all of it, we’ve always had too many other bloody problems to contend with, to be able to afford to pander to the most outrageous demands of feminist nutjobs – but we are on the brink – with the EU breathing down our necks and basically having us by the short and curly’s – it won’t take much – and it won’t take that long, unless we take steps now to halt this shit in its tracks.

I’ve posted some new links on the blogroll – some useful information on those sites – am not endorsing or saying “these are great sites” go here – just that there is some useful information to be gleaned from them.

With regard to MRI (Men’s Rights Ireland) – we – and yes there is a “we” have been reassessing and revaluating our focus as well – but – because I’ve personally been dealing with more shit in the last couple of months personally than I have in quite a while – it had been put on hold so that I could.

While I have posted on this blog – it has been by way of being a strange kind of “therapy” from my perspective this blog is my baby – but MRI (Men’s Rights Ireland) is and will be a joint effort of several people – one or two who have had their own difficulties to deal with in the last couple of months – it never rains but it pours does it?

I do want to thank all those who have over the last 7/8 months and in particular in the last month or so who have posted some really interesting, intriguing and thought provoking comments, and especially some very kind ones – thank you.

I have spent the last couple of days going through all the comments and during my travels I have found myself pausing and re-reading and thinking – now that comment should be an article – so – I will be emailing a couple of people who have posted these comments to invite you to submit them as an article for MRI (Men’s Rights Ireland) – well you do know that I get your email address when you post a comment?  🙂

Don’t panic – won’t be for a week or so – and sure – you can just say no.

As for those who have taken the time to post less that positive comments – and am not talking about criticisms of anything I have written – just long streams of mostly incomprehensible shoite – fuck off – grow up – get a life – get a hobby.

I turned on moderation on ALL comments, even for those that previously just got posted automatically about two or three weeks ago I think – because to be honest I wanted to be able to view every comment before I clicked “approve” MOST comments as soon as I see the name get “approved” and unless a comment relates to whatever the article the comment appears on – it gets DELETED.

I am a big advocate of Free Speech – it is a fundamental Human Right – but even that has limits – and long poisonous rants are mine.

To my friend who sent me the poem – many thanks for reminding me of something that I thought I had lost – long story – if you ever find yourself in Ireland the Guinness is on me and I’ll tell it to you, it involves falling off a horse, an actual horse not a metaphorical one, which then proceeded to shit on my head………

🙂

 

Previous Older Entries Next Newer Entries