On Fire but Blacked Out: The Thomas Ball Story
Imagine, if you will, that a 16-year-old girl is denied an abortion and tries to get justice through the court system. She is jerked around and told “tough luck honey” a number of times and finally becomes distraught and sets herself on fire in front of the courthouse. Now, imagine what happens next in the media: The story becomes a firestorm. MSNBC and CNN have the incident scrolling along the bottom of the news every hour while the New York Times interviews feminists who pontificate about this brave “political move” and its implications for women’s individual freedoms.
Now, on to what really happened. A 58-year-old New Hampshire man by the name of Thomas James Ball set himself on fire in front of a courthouse because he was “done being bullied for being a man” by the family court system. And despite his horrible and public death, he got little media attention. Just a few activists on the web and a few news outlets such as International Business Times and the Keene Sentinel picked it up. Even Wikipedia took his page down.
Basically, Ball’s last act was treated by the traditional news media as that of a lone nutcase with no political significance whatsoever. The difference in these two cases comes down to what the American media finds relevant: girls and women, they’re important; men and boys, not so much. Christina Hoff Sommers was right: the war against boys and men is still going strong.
And Thomas Ball knew it. He left a long letter to the Keene Sentinel explaining his grievances with the court system and with the society that devalues men. When often is the case when men complain, his grievances were seen as whining rather than as real problems.
As one of my commenters pointed out in a post I put up on the case, when a woman burns her husband to death in his sleep, it’s seen as a major wake-up call regarding violence against women, and is immortalized in an award-winning movie starring Farah Fawcett titled The Burning Bed.
I gotta say I disagree with this. I know several men who, in various ways, have been screwed by the courts during divorces or in their aftermath. None of them ever went to the ultimately self-absorbed extent of killing themselves. It’s dramatic, yes, but it’s ultimately narcissistic and selfish, and does no one any good. Frankly, I think the media should ignore more suicides, not glorify or publicize them. I’ll agree that the family court system can be skewed against men, but that’s no excuse for depriving your children of their father.
David, the story isn’t whether Ball should have killed himself, the story is the hypocritical and politically-drive non-coverage of the even.
If you want to protest the coverage of bad behavior, there are about ten million other places your efforts would be better served.
I’ll agree that the family court system can be skewed against men, but that’s no excuse for depriving your children of their father.
Your opinion rings hollow. There is no limit to the rights-shattering abuses of the so-called family law system, a hive of corruption and danger to parents of both sexes literally mad enough that the former Soviet Union abolished one like it as too abusive of society.
The system is federal and it includes the welfare state and numerous constitutional assaults. It is routinely egregious, dishonest, sexist, illegal, fraudulent, thieving, and a massive national conflict of interest yet the machinery continues every single day.
To be hounded as a criminal for parenting is enough to drive a just man to his death and thousands have done just that. Ball drew attention to the system, but precisely as Helen points out, to little coverage, that being the gender feminist way in media, the academy, and popular culture.
The next time you go to opine on something you haven’t the background to opine on, think better of it.
Ten,
He didn’t deprive his children of their father by committing suicide because the family courts had already done that for him.
I was quoting the previous comment.
And what if it was the courts who deprived those children of their father
The decisions of family courts can often be false and absurd miscarriages of judicial power. I sympathize with the Mr. Ball and also his family. But I want to add that, as fathers lose, so do their children. I recently witnessed another egregious case of gender bias within the NH family law. The son of a friend had been repeatedly left in the primary custody of his mentally-ill, abusive, often psychotic mother. (I’m not just name-calling; she was recently committed to McLean Hospital against her will.) Every year since the child turned 10, the father had been in court to re-gain custody. It was only at age 16, that his executive father finally prevailed. Sadly, this was after a suicide attempt by the child. This family court judge ignored testimony about the mother year-after-year, maybe because she was affluent, and had a professional job. Thank God the child did not die, and he is slowly getting better in the care of his father. No thanks to the state of New Hampshire though.
You idiot. How much pain did this guy have to be in to make it preferable to set himself on fire and die?
David, you have COMPLETELY missed the point by a mile. Dr Helen was not suggesting that self-immolation was a proper response for Ball’s situation. Her point was that the media is willfully ignoring this act of political protest purely because he is a man.
Composition 101: Take it.
“I’ll agree that the family court system can be skewed against men, but that’s no excuse for depriving your children of their father.”
Did he deprive them of their father, or did the courts?
Bingo. And thanks for bringing attention to that reality.
The courts are structured to give a woman a complete pass on selfish and narcissistic behavior. Social conservatives are more than happy to be indistinguishable from feminists in this regard.
Everyone should read the Misandry Bubble to find out how feminism is the new Jim Crow.
Other good references:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men's_rights
http://avoiceformen.com
http://the-spearhead.com
http://www.reddit.com/r/mensrights
Right on Dave..
Being a man is tough….its a thankless job…paying taxes, providing for the world, doing all the heavy lifting, fighing all the wars, and getting screwed at every turn…The Government, Lawyers, Spouses and Ex-Spouses….
Who else but a Man is told by a Judge how much it costs to raise a child? The Fed says its a $2500.00 yearly expence, but a JUDGE can declare any sum he thinks is “appropriate” with no limit.
Its like “goodfellas”
65% of your monthly income? F*ck you, pay
No roof over YOUR head while you pay HER mortage? F*ck you, pay
Kids that HATE you turn 18, think youre finally off the leash? F*ck you, pay for college.
Fall on hard times, lost your job? F*ck you, pay…full price, no exceptions, we’ll keep track what you “owe”
Imagine the Government coming to a MARRIED man and demanding an account be set up to “keep track” of what he “owes” his family while he’s laid off, and ENFORCE a system to make sure he “spends” that exact amount when he’s back on his feet.
Being a man is tough…you actually have to stop “being a man” by constanly foregoing the simple and righteous physical ass-whooping of every invasive parasitic scumbag that imposes themself upon your basic rights.
Its very stressful, and some guys eventually just burst into flames in stead of taking it out physically on the ones who truly deserve it.
Because “being a man” today means:
Being screwed to death, without so much as a whimper.
You’re comments would have much more value and respect if you’d clean up your filthy mouth!!
Pussy-whipped much?
He did clean up his mouth – he censored himself. Repeatedly. He is using visceral emotions to make his point.
He isn’t using his mouth. This is the Internet, d!ckhead.
Dear Mr. Sensitive,
I did clean up my language,
I was polite enough to use an “ass to risk”
in the middle of my F-bombs
How else would YOU quote dialog from a gangster movie?
The other “ass to risk” was posting my real email address…twice now.
Would you dare the same?
At first reading of his comments, I would agree, cleaning up his wording may have been more affective. But, after reading the entire thing, he is spot on! I don’t think I could have said it better myself.
The offensive language mirrors the offensive behavior that the COurts dish out to men. We would never establish the Violence against African American’s act, or the Violence against Jews Act, but it simply okay that our CONGRESS creates the Violence Against Women’s act.
Wake up guys, while you are sleeping off a cold beer, a hard day at work, or a day of self pity, your rights are being stripped way. Until you stand up and protest what is wrong, what is being systematically taken from you, the beatings will continue. and the offensive behavior, with offensive language will continue. SO, get off of your f*cking dead *ss, and onto your dying feet and start making some noise to protect your children and the next generation of children. Go to World War III like our fathers went to World War II with the intent of kicking the Bias out of the Courts.
*your
The solution is simple: don’t get married and don’t have children. You can have a perfectly wonderful life without doing either.
Given what the State has done to the family, this may be truer than many care to admit. Given what it evidently intends to yet do, soon they will have to.
All should read Taken Into Custody by Stephen Baskerville. It’s the bible for the criminals in office who have declared war on parents and children and why they wage it.
I agree, elf. I’m a 56 year old bachelor who has never once regretted my deision to forgo marriage and children. From what I hear about marriage statistics recently, I’m not the only guy to come to that conclusion.
Sure…so don’t get married…and then have trouble finding dates and be thought of as being gay. UNLESS of course you do date women, and have no interest in getting married…and she STILL winds up pregnant.
Oh and while your paying child support ANYWAY…you live alone, even into your old age.
Yeah, THAT looks like a good deal.
Chief568:
Are you saying it is a RAW deal, then?
Okay. But if it is, whose fault is THAT?
I will tell you: it is the fault of the culture we live in.
Correct?
Therefore, we must force that culture to change…mustn’t we??
So, what about it then? Are YOU up for the job?
Or . . are you just making excuses for the culture we live in.
I guess that would make you part of the problem . . . wouldn’t it??
I am a woman. I have not been through a divorce or child custody battles, but I have seen both male and female friends and relatives go through it. And it seems like, to a truly sad degree, Guzzipete hits the nail on the head. I have known of men living in tents in a friend’s back yard, living out of their cars, living on a friend’s sofa after getting so screwed in a divorce. I knew of one man who lost the house HE owned before the marriage. I knew of another man forced to pay child support for the STEP CHILDREN. (Apparently, their mother couldn’t extract enough of a pound of flesh from the children’s father.) I knew of one man who, because he filed for the divorce, had to pay for HER lawyer–and then she would miss meetings, and HE would be charged for that time. I knew of one man whose ex-wife would only let their kids go to the community college because if they went away to college, the child support would be paid directly to the kids, instead of to her. For the most part, men are so screwed in divorces.
The solution–take a gooooooood long time BEFORE getting married to a particular person; make sure you are marrying the right person for the right reasons. Stay out of the sack until, well, maybe until your wedding night, but if not then, at least date for a looooooong time. Try to make sure that divorce is something unlikely to happen. It’ll make EVERYONE’S life better!
Better yet, for a man it’s to simply forget about it. America can import all the people we need. We don’t have to make even one baby, given that we have a baby mill just under the border. We can literally outsource childbirth.
Genius! And within 50 years there will be no White people left on the planet!
Of course, that’s the real point. Feminism makes relationships so intolerable that the White birthrate is destroyed – just look it up online. White aren’t even replacing themselves. And meanwhile the government imports millions of nonwhites every year, and pays the nonwhites already year based on how many children they pump out.
Wake up, people. This is genocide, by definition.
that’s some truth right there…
Yes, suicide is useless. Nobody accomplishes anything by dying. As in “Patton”, you accomplish things by making the other guys die. If there’s a war against men and boys (and it isn’t arguable that there isn’t), when are the men and boys gonna start fighting it?
If there is going to be a war (as you suggest) it is important to know who you are fighting. Who are we at war with? Since most systems (courts, legislatures, academic institutions, businesses, administrations, etc.) are run by men, who is the enemy we are fighting?
The police and the infrastructure (banks, farms, electric grid, water delivery) that supports them.
It would be a shame if there was a war, because the only way to win would be to inflict such massive collateral damage that society itself would collapse.
It’s not pointless if it calls attention to an injustice. Thomas Ball tried, but the media blacked him out because they like things the way they are – unjust.
David, your comment is cowardly.
The mother already deprived the children of their father, by filing for a ‘no-fault’ divorce. I see you don’t want to hold the woman accountable for her actions, just like most conservative cowards.
Everyone should read ‘The Misandry Bubble’. Both debtors prison and slavery have returned to America, under the guise of ‘feminism’.
Also read “Sexual Utopia in Power” by F. Roger Devlin. An even more powerful indictment against marriage.
dontmarry.wordpress.com/2009/03/24/articles-by-f-roger-devlin
“conservative cowards”? Project much, Toads?
Agree with David absolutely here – and frankly, I’m getting tired, in all the current venues, of people misrepresenting what those of us who don’t agree that Ball is a legitimate political statement are saying. 1) That media might make some other incident, such as a 16 y/o female getting an abortion, into a political statement does not mean that EITHER incident has validity. 2) Ball was offered entirely reasonable ways out of this dilemna, which he refused. 3) Feeling pain does not give you any added legitimacy, and certainly does not prove that you were badly treated. 4) Some, even many men may be mistreated by family courts, but Ball’s own letter, a self-justifying screed I do not ake at face value, undercuts any idea that he is just some reasonable guy who happened to fall into some bad luck and ended up in the tentacles of some Orwellian system. Opinion, based on decades of mental health experience: If you take his evaluation at face value, with no suspicion that someone else might have a different POV worth considering, it is because that is what you Want To See. There is nothing in Ball’s writing that proves it.
Whenever anyone is in a divorce/custody/family court situation, the number of people who pop up, over-identifying with one character whose situation is “oh so similar” to theirs, is amazing. It’s a national Rorschach, with everyone seeing what they want, regardless of the data. “Hey, he’s a guy who says he’s gotten screwed by the system and can’t see his kids. I’m a guy who says he’s been screwed by the system and can’t see my kids. He must be right! Which means I must be right! Which means the system is screwing us, and this just proves it! And the fact that no one believes me means that they don’t believe all men! Yes, the system hates us all!” This is not remotely close to reasoning.
As to Wikipedia deleting his page – they shouldn’t. But I don’t see that as evidence of trivialising the cause he tried to hide behind, but trivialising Ball himself, because he failed to reach even a low threshhold of convincing anyone that his sad case was legitimately part of any larger story. And frankly, I’m not convinced his sad case is part of any larger story either.
Deep breath here, everyone. This does not mean that I think no such cases are ever part of a larger story. When I hear about dramatic incidents, I am willing to consider the possibility. I did, and Ball’s story does not make the cut. Not close.
I think you need to spend some more time in the trenches and not tying to arm chair QB.
There are many entities starting to speak to these things from all over the westernized world. The guy on the bridge in Australia… another protest like this one.
Tom Leykis has said it best for American men not to get married and I 100% agree.
The NOW organization is all about putting men into prison and making non payment of child support a felony. This include men who have no job or have been afflicted with medical issues.
Uhhh . . . clueless, much?
It’s not really about condoning Ball’s actions, but about a very real issue about modern American attitudes about men and manhood, and specifically about how men are treated in family court.
There, did that help clear things up?
Mr. Nicholas: By the tone of your reply, I would guess that you have never had the pleasure of appearing in family court. I spent over 17 years dealing with the family court system in three different states. I can assure you that what happened to this man has been something that many men have thought about on more than one occasion. While no one condones suicide, the frustration of dealing with an ex-spouse who threatens not to send your child for visitation repeatedly, takes you to court for trivial things year after year, it might amaze you what goes through one’s mind. While it was relatively inexpensive to get divorced, I spent nearly 10X that amount just ensuring that I could have somewhat regular visitations with my child who moved nearly 2000 miles away before I had any say in the matter.
Fascinating all of the visceral replies I’ve received to my comment, some taking it more or less out of context or misrepresenting what I said in some fashion. Yes, it’s bad that family court is skewed in favor of women and mothers, and against men and fathers. I have two different pretty good friends who got screwed pretty badly in court over this very sort of thing. In answer to the one commenter, no, I’ve never been in Family Court before. I have had close friends who went through it, one in particular who was immensely frustrated. Here in California, the State provided a free attorney to his ex-wife for the hearing, while my friend and his lawyer were welcome to *observe* the proceedings, but only if they said nothing. My friend wound up having his child support doubled, because one of his two children (with his ex-wife) had chosen to live with *him*, instead of the ex. Another friend was sued for back child support by an ex-girlfriend who he hadn’t paid anything to, over the years. When he got her pregnant, he was an alcoholic, and bad about his responsibilities; sixteen years later, the ex-girlfriend’s new boyfriend deserts her, she needs money, so she sues for back child support (little if any of which, of course, is going to go to the actual child). Yeah, the system sucks. So what, is that any reason to commit suicide?
Everyone is acting as if this happened in a vacuum. Setting yourself on fire is an remarkably selfish act. Doing it in public is doubly selfish. Imagine if you had been there, and smelled the guy burning, listened to his screams as he cooked. There *were* people there. They didn’t (many of them, presumably) rule in his case, or even know who he was. Yes, his pain was no doubt greater than theirs, but how is it virtuous that he inflicted some of his pain on others, who had nothing to do with him?
As for the issue of whether he deprived his children of their father, or their mother (and his ex) did, there’s a simple point to be made. The mother separated her children from her ex. Maybe, with the help of the courts, she’d be able to keep him completely away from them until they turned 18. However, there’s absolutely no proof that the children wouldn’t at some point have reconciled with their father. It happens all the time. He could have met grandchildren also, bounced them on his knee, etc. But he killed himself, and none of this will happen; instead he’s just spectacularly dead.
I don’t believe I’m being callous or heartless about this. My own father killed himself (more or less accidentally) when I was four, trying to drive home from a poker game after having too many beers. Regardless of what excuses you make for Thomas Ball, the fact is that he did something that can’t be undone, and he did it deliberately. Is the ex-wife complicit, in that she kept the children from him? Perhaps, to an extent, though his suicide doesn’t exactly make him look like the sort you’d want watching your children. Is the family court system complicit in what happened, because it’s skewed in favor of women? Perhaps, though again the issue of his stability is obviously raised by his actions. Do either of those things excuse what he did? In my mind, the answer’s a resounding “NO.”
As for whether there should be more media coverage of this, as I said originally: that would validate his suicide, give him the attention he wanted. I’m comfortable with the media ignoring him, frankly.
His children were already deprived of him that is why he did what he did.
It wasn’t narcissistic but your claim is.
Ignore the fact that family courts drive thousands of men to such actions every year and all you will get for your lack of concern is a lot of dead men who could have been helped if people gave a damn about the effects of a father having his children torn from him.
I’ll bet if the story where about a woman killing herself you words would be a lot kinder.
Fifty years ago, a man who protested his nation’s corrupt regime by burning himself to death in a city square set off a volcano of public outrage, toppled the regime, and started a war that resulted in the death 50,000-plus American soldiers, sailors and airmen.
Less than six months ago, the self-immolation of a Tunisian street vendor lit a firestorm of revolt across the Middle East. Tunisia’s regime toppled … Egypt’s Mubarak fled … Syria, Yemen, Libya are torn by civil strive.
This month, in the USA, in a state whose slogan “Live Free Or Die” is belied by their corrupt Family Law system, a man who was pushed beyond the brink in that system made the same awful, fatal political statement of turning himself into a human torch. He could no longer “Live Free” in his homeland, so he chose to DIE spectacularly, hoping his terrible light would shine into the dark corners of a system that drove him to death.
What is his epitaph? “Oh, he was a nut-case. Totally narcissistic. Ignore this, folks, nothing going on. Jokes at eleven.”
I am revulsed by the useful idiots who dismiss Thomas Ball in this way.
He chose the most horrific of deaths, the most public and shocking of deaths: self-immolation. He tried to point a finger at the wreckers. And the mainstream media said “It’s only a finger. Ignore.”
I mourn Thomas Ball, and I mourn the freedoms that once graced this country. And to the dismissive media, I damn your purblind eyes.
Hear !! Hear !!
Spot on. Personally, I went thru the ‘gauntlet’ of the the DR so-called ‘court’.
It is inhumane, violent, bigoted and criminal. I fired ten so-called ‘lawyers’, who did nothing but steal my money. I lived in my car, lost my children, almost
lost my license to practice medicine because of a lying ex-c*nt, and nearly lost my life because of depression and being financially devastated. In the end I won custody of my twin sons, they are 22 now and still come to ‘our’ home for the summers, rather than the re-married ex-c*nt who they now rarely see.
I will never re-marry under the present conditions. If a woman I am seeing even brings up marriage, to the curb and no looking back. Chivalry died and yes the beotches killed it, dead, dead, dead.
The reminders of Vietnam and Tunisia were perfect illustrations of what the columnist was trying to point out in the column. Great follow-up.
Nothing irritates me quite like men who hate other men. I am just glad that you came right out and said that you agree. You see, this is ammo…
Not only are you for a Stalinist-style denial of information and a press blackout in this man’s case, but you actually had the audacity to say that he deprived the children of their father? Did you even read his final words? I take it that you did not.
Perhaps God Himself shall take your progeny and life away, and give you no recourse but to burn yourself black into the cold sleep of death. I wonder, should Justice be done considering your most callous attitude towards the late Mr. Ball, if you would think twice about your words as you smelled the gasoline and brought forth your match? I’m sure you would be hoping that everyone would just cover the whole thing up, like the corrupt government and psycho feminazis have been doing for all of my life. Are you aware that the femi-fascists would run you through a meat grinder if they could? Why is it that you refuse to face this evil? For what are we if we can do naught? Such cowardice and ignorance are the poster children of the feminists–surely they have well-wrought their most wicked works…
Such fascism is insanity, and I refuse to ascribe to it. I will never support ignorance and the denial of the Truth. The Truth is that this man had the courage to die in the hope that America might be saved…but thanks to the majority who really do think like you, I believe, that we are all doomed if we stay here.
Say, here’s a thought: Have any of you compassionate souls dumping on Ball even bothered to read his letter? It’s long and well thought out, and he explains his emotional and financial torture at the hands of a system that is rigged against men.
So how about it, kiddies? Have you read his letter? Read it to the end? And read it with an open mind? Get back to me. I’ll wait.
Way to miss the point. I suspect reading comprehension isn’t your strong point.
—-1. David W. Nicholas
I’ll agree that the family court system can be skewed against men, but that’s no excuse for depriving your children of their father.—-
The court system is already doing that you idiot.
The System deprived them of their father, not Thomas Ball.
He wanted more than anything to be with them, but the system wouldn’t let him.
When the system was about to impose the harshest penalty permitted by law, imprisonment, further removing him from his kids, and he saw no way out, that is when he did what he did.
And of course this was not an isolated act out of the blue, he had endured many years of abuse by the family court system before he could just not take it anymore. And the family court system is getting worse, not better, against men.
That’s a repulsive story to use to point out the unfairness of the court system and/or the unfairness of the media! The guy shouldn’t have slapped his daughter and he shouldn’t have committed suicide in such a gruesome way. Blech! He makes a lousy victim.
So only the saintly deserve fair treatment in the courts?
Pathetic little pussy.
She was 4 YEARS OLD, for crissake! The guy was a moron. Of course the courts should defend his rights as a citizen, it’s just that he isn’t gonna get any sympathy for being a narcissistic jerk.
But you give women a free pass for doing the same or worse.
Most violent child abuse is done by women.
And since you read the entire thing, you also read the part where he related that his wife told him – much later – that the DYCF threatened *her* with prosecution if she didn’t file a complaint against her husband?
So why don’t you quit lying and read the man’s letter — for comprehension this time.
With regard to the actual circumstances of the “slap” people might like a more detailed description of the event. It can be found here, as a small part of this Thomas Ball’s story. A story which you may find makes it very difficult to simply dismiss him.
For the edification of those who care to look: http://apathyonline.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/thomasmystory.pdf
I read that rambling, self-serving screed, and it made me care for the guy even less. He allows his relationship with his wife to deteriorate to the point the children are suffering alarming symptoms from having to live in a household poisoned with hatred, blame and distrust. Both parents, of course, are responsible for putting the children in that environment. That lame excuse about how the cut in the girl’s mouth was tiny and he hardly touched her…all abusers make the exact same excuse, “She attacked me! I didn’t lay a hand on her. Okay, I had to defend myself but I just pushed her to keep her away.” Meanwhile the ugly welt on the woman’s face is growing by the minute. You can see it on “Cops” any time. And that guy with that BS about how the daughter looks like him, and he makes a lot of saliva, so she must make a lot of saliva and all that mixed with a teeny-tiny amount of blood…gimmie a break! All that might have blown over if he didn’t have such a bad relationship with his wife. Makes you suspect she had good reason to get a restraining order. Remember that obsessive screed is his side of the story. All perps minimize their role.
Since you read the entire thing, you read the part where DYCF issued a report, specifically with regard to the incident of the slap, that charges of abuse or neglect were “Unfounded”. In other words without merit.
That is after all the point of this mess. The system crushed this man. Separated him from his family and children. All over an incident, which while unfortunate, was trivial. Now that scrutiny of this man’s story might cause a review of all the various issues revealed here, the main stream media has blacked out coverage.
Your venom is revealing and not supported by the facts. Also unsupported by the fact is your characterization of Mr. Ball. One must wonder what you are reacting to here.
A lousy victim huh?
Could you give just an example of a really good victim?
No matter what you come up with, I could show you thousands of men that match that description. The only thing is, they are ignored even more so by the media, another hohum story.
Thomas Ball has been slightly paid attention to, because it was so shocking.
He did what he did not for himself, but as a political statement against the fundamentally abusive and illegal actions of the family court system, just read his last letter to the media before his immolation, if you care to open your perspectives.
Whats repulsive is posters dismissing the issue and kicking a dead man. He was in despair as the all-mighty-state, and all its functionaries who justify their positions, took his family away. How would you react? You got kids? Been through the process mentioned above? The process is the punishment and in the end you are deprived of your family and usually financially fleeced to boot.
Well, there certainly is a double standard today on television, especially on cable. On Cable you have entire channels specifically dedicated for women, such as Lifetime, Oxygen, WE (Women’s Entertainment), Style, and a few others. And do you know what the motto for Lifetime is? “Lifetime, Television for Women.” They can get away with that and nobody says a word. Or how about a television program like “The View,” only with men sitting around a table moaning and groaning instead of women? Fat chance of seeing anything like that on the air.
But if a TV Networks said “The Man’s Channel, television for men,” there would be a national outcry over that. I think there is one Channel that tried to do something like that, I think it’s called “Spike,” but it’s ratings aren’t that good and the media pretty much ignores it, let alone promotes it. Just a few minor examples of the double standard in the media today. And trust me, there are a lot of them.
I think the more pervasive and insidious example is the way most “humorous” commercials feature the dopey (even if menschey) husband befuddled by some product/service-related problem, condescendingly addressed by his loving wife, who solves the problem in no time flat. Virtually every TV commercial follows this pattern…it’s beyond a cliche. Now, try to conceive of the firestorm if even ONE commercial got out that even HINTED at a similar portrayal of a woman, needing help from her “superior” husband…
I do realize that is the way it was up until maybe the late ’70′s…so like the reverse racism so prevalent today, reverse sexism is p.c. This is sometimes acknowledged by the practitioners, but justified by the “the oppressed can not be racist/sexist no matter what they say” argument. Only the oppressors…ie; white males, can be racist/sexist.
Point well taken. Have you watched much television aimed at school-aged children and teens? It isn’t just men/dad’s in the crosshairs–it is parents and teachers in general.
I could not agree more with you on that one. Of course in the 50s the stereotypes were the opposite with dumb blondes whose main role in life was making sure hubbies coffee was hot and his shirts free of the dreaded ring around the collar.
It’s time to quit the stereotyping in either direction but with the libs in charge of most of the media that’s not going to happen.
I think a lot of people are missing the point, here.
Seems to me, Dr Helen is following the theme she has set out from the beginning. The double standards applied depending on the attributes you assign women and men.
If you advocate that men should be more in touch with their feelings and compassionate side, then how can you ignore it when a man actually demonstrates, to the extreme, that he is?
As said; a woman does it, she’s desperate. A man does the same thing, he’s a nutcase. And that applies to the slap, as well as the burning.
“If you advocate that men should be more in touch with their feelings and compassionate side…”
Well done. And once that softer side is displayed…the femanazis then demand….”That you act like a man and stop sniveling”!!
Amazing.
There are a lot of sports channels and sports events on the ABC channels with bikini babes geared towards men only though.
It’s pretty clear that Nightelf doesn’t have any kids. I do. I never bloodied their lip, but being human, I certainly lost my patience with them — and my temper — and, as in any human relationship, probably did or said things it would have been better not to have said or done. I don’t think there’s a parent alive who wouldn’t recognize themselves in that statement.
The feminists have called for an all-out war against men and boys in North America, which has put women/men relationships in a winner/loser mode which has been devastating to individual men and women, the family, and the well-being of our children.
I’m tired of women always playing “the victim” card; I’m tired of men always being “the guilty ones.” I know plenty of women who are unstable, violent, cruel, and vindictive — and they’ve got the feminist narrative on their side, which says that they’re never to blame.
Well, I’m sorry. That’s not a tenable position. Men and woman are human beings, with human weaknesses and foibles for which both sexes need to take responsibility. In the past 30 years, the feminist “mystique” (I prefer to call it the feminist mendacity) has painted a distorted picture of male/female relationships which has resulted in a full-out war of the sexes in which, frankly, there are no winners, only losers.
As a woman, I’m fully aware of my own transgressions and would never presume or insist that all of my problems were caused by my difficult (but beloved) father (who, from the time I was six, lived away from my family), or by the boyfriends I never married, or by my husband. Relationships are a two-way street — and involve loving another person, which should mean the ability to forgive and be forgiven. You never hear those words in the feminist lexicon.
I’m extremely disappointed and perturbed that feminists and our court system seem not to recognize mutual responsibility and accountability, as they pile on men and put them, far too often, in Catch-22 situations. Far too often it’s the women who are the bullies — but they can hide behind the billowing skirts of “men-are-always-to-blame” feminism. What a travesty. What a tragedy.
RIP, Mr. Ball.
Come on! The guy slapped a 4 year old girl. Sure it’s hard to be a parent, but why emphasize a case which plays into the feminists hands by holding up this moron as some kind of victim? Kids can drive you crazy, but you don’t slap a 4 year old in the face, like, duh!
She hit the nail on the head with grace and honesty when she said this:
“I never bloodied their lip, but being human, I certainly lost my patience with them — and my temper — and, as in any human relationship, probably did or said things it would have been better not to have said or done.”
I think that any parent who actively raises their kids and doesn’t just shrug and let them do as they please or fly into an inchoate and ineffective verbal rage can relate to that statement. As a father of 2 I know I can. Raising young kids for the first time is a wonderful experience, but it is also a highly emotional crucible in which you will come face-to-face with the best and the worst in yourself and your partner many times.
In my opinion, the man was at least willing to institute boundaries on his child’s behavior, however clumsily. Was anyone truly hurt? No. Was this sort of action and result a chronic occurrence? No. But to a fly on the wall (that’s us, now) the scene was ugly, and to a woman scorned looking to score points against her husband, a ‘perfect’ opportunity to paint him as a demon in the courts.
Hitting a child is wrong, but it’s a greater wrong to destroy an otherwise functioning family, when minor corrective action would suffice and prove better for ALL concerned.
But doing what’s best for all concerned it not what’s at issue in the courts in these cases. Doing what hurts the man is. That’s the tragedy, much more than a man slapping his disobedient child.
I know a lot of adult children who might have seriously benefited from a bit of slapping early on!
I have three kids, now grown, one with a child or her own who recently told me “Abba, I would have rather you hit me more and lectured me less”.
All three of my kids will tell you that they’ve been slapped in the face by their father. They will also tell you that the reason was that they were rude to their mom. I don’t think they had to get that message more than once.
I also recently took off my belt and hit the table with it just to put a little fear of God into my granddaughter. Did I deliberately terrify an 8 year old? Damn straight I did.
As long as the goal is to inflict a little self-reflection inducing pain, not to injure, there’s nothing wrong with corporal punishment by parents.
Sometimes you do slap a 4-year-old in the face. Sometimes you do. I guess this truth is taboo.
No, I don’t.
Elf, there is no way you could ever have been responsible for a child. I have spanked my children, I have bellowed and yelled at them, not to hurt them, but to get their attention when nothing else will do.
A real father will lose his temper with his children from time to time. A real father won’t physically hurt his kids, but he may scar them emotionally so that they understand that they have crossed a line they should not have crossed. When my son, at age 7, whipped a stick around, leaving welts on his younger sister, I was furious. I had told him several times before to swing that stick somewhere else –and I had even pointed out where he could do this. I roughly spun him around to face me, tore the stick from his hands, broke it, and in an ice cold voice told him not to ever do that again. He cried, mostly from the shock of me getting upset with him.
This is what we do as Dads. Today, at 11 years old, he safely uses a compound bow to shoot broadheads at targets 20 yards away. He’ll be using his skills to hunt deer this fall. In a few years, he’ll be driving. I want him to know how to handle real risks, so that when given 3000 pounds of steel to drive, he’ll act in a reasonable and safe manner.
My point for relating this story is that calmly saying “stop” doesn’t work. Sometimes, as every parent knows, you need to hit the reset button on your kids. They will cry. You’ll feel bad afterward. But there usually is an important life lesson to be learned.
Thomas Ball lost his temper with his daughter. I’m sure he regretted it and that she probably didn’t deserve the full fury that he exposed her to. But we’re human. We make mistakes. And in the end, his daughter recovered.
I have made mistakes of lesser degrees with my children. I regret every one of them. But they know, and I know that these are mistakes made because I care. I will not foist a disrespectful, ignorant, or savage jerk upon this world.
That’s what fathers do in this world, Elf. Maybe yours didn’t give a damn. If that’s true, I pity you. Nevertheless, I will not lower my standards just because your parents might not have had any.
“No, I don’t.”
My father and mother never slapped me across the face either, NightElf. They were far from gentle disciplinarians (I got spanked a ton of times), but they never ONCE made me bleed. They never once hit me on the face. There are delicate bones there, and teeth, and eyes, and all sorts of things vital to a young person’s future. No parent in their right mind would discipline a child there. They would only hit them on the face if THEY were angry, and cared more about venting their anger than about their child.
Now maybe my parents were saints, unattainable models of parental perfection that no one else could ever match. But I don’t think so. I think if they managed not to slap my sibling and I across our faces, if they managed to discipline us physically without ever making us bleed, if they managed to care more for their kids than for their own petty payback, then anyone else ought to be able to do the same.
Gee, “elf,” you seem to fixated on something that isn’t even the main issue. Think much? Try getting with the overall issue and commenting on that.
There are moments– split seconds– in our lives that forever change us. It is not unimaginable that a good, decent parent “loses it” for that split second, and creates incredible emotional damage for the child, and unbearable emotional pain to himself (or herself).
Bet that the pain that he sufferred from having slapped his child like that was also self-immolation. I know it would have been for me. I know that if I ever “lost it” for a nanosecond and did that to my child, well, actually I don’t know– I just fear what my own inner damage would be.
Now, compound that with family and marriage torn apart, the replay in court and public, and the brutal experience of “family court” for years.
The man set himself on fire. The fire must have seemed far less a painful experience than his life.
“Come on! The guy slapped a 4 year old girl.” So you believe he deserved everything that the state did to him? You don’t find it just a LITTLE out of proportion?
“…holding up this moron as some kind of victim?” Same questions.
My mother slapped me plenty, even drew blood.
Of course I almost burned down the house, and thought the neighbor’s house was just like ours and helped myself to some candy bars, and stole a pack of gum from the grocery store, and launched fireworks that I stole from my uncle into my grandmother’s house, and painted the walls, etc..
After each incident, she slapped me, spanked me, beat me, belittled me, threw me in jail, beat me some more, disowned me, took all of my belongings except a mattress and made me stay in the room for a week fed once a day. I always prayed that she would get dad to spank me. He was fair.
Then when she decided to F*ck the family lawyer. Magically a judge waved his hand and my father was accused of all the above things. I was told I was a liar and that my father had brainwashed me. My Father was ordered to take medication that almost killed him, He almost lost his job (School Teacher) and my mother, the lawyer and her buddies divided up his life as the spoils of war.
Just remember many of us watched it happen to our fathers. We have a leg up where they didn’t.
Women, at least in America, are more dangerous than six loaded chambers in a game of Russian roulette if you are a man.
So girls you are stuck with the likes of those who play Russian roulette. I hope it works out for you.
And yes I’m a total loser, defective, can’t get laid, scary, creepy dude.
So don’t waste your fingers. The message wasn’t for you. Thanks for the opening though.
Bravo! An excellent comment. Wish I could state the problem that well. We women who see this will continue to fight the good fight. We cannot allow the media and society to hound our sons and grandsons. I already see my daughter-in-law coming up against it as her son goes off to day care. Our sons are just as special and precious as our daughters and we know it. Keep it up.
Unless I miss my guess, the photo at the top of the column is not of Ball, but of a Buddhist monk in South Vietnam, circa 1967, immolating himself to protest U.S. military operations vs. the VC and NVA.
When such very public suicides were committed in that place and time, it was front-page news in the U.S., with the news media saying it “proved” the U.S. was evil for opposing the “self-determination” of the Vietnamese people. Said self-determination, of course, being to become a Communist state (enforced by the force of the VC and NVA); the only sort the news media then considered legitimate. (Today, they also like Islamism.)
Since their reaction to Ball has been the exact opposite (think “crickets chirping”), it is logical to conclude that it is not the act which interests them, but the agenda which motivates it.
Incidentally, you might want to look up the number of Buddhist monks who survived the Communist “triumph” in Southeast Asia- especially Cambodia. They apparently were not popular with their new “egalitarian” socialist overlords.
The news media didn’t see fit to mention that little detail, either. Again, agendas, not acts.
clear ether
eon
I noticed the same thing but the point is reinforced in that the photo was (errr…) inflammatory and helped overthrow the South Vietnamese gov’t, Diem if memory serves.
Diem was actually the best (only) candidate to lead Viet Nam; it was the “dragon lady” Madame Nhu whose behavior (e.g., She referred to the self-immolation of the monks as “barbecues”–but at least she NOTICED.) caused the American public to despise the Diem government; it was JFK’s withdrawal of support that brought about the assassination of Diem and Nhu.
….JFK was more then an innocent. he told the Generals he didn’t care what they did when they asked permission to off Diem.
#6 eon…..
“Unless I miss my guess, the photo at the top of the column is not of Ball, but of a Buddhist monk in South Vietnam, circa 1967, immolating himself to protest U.S. military operations vs. the VC and NVA….”
…..you’re a sharp observer, and I agree with you after calling attention to that small picture.. That car in the background is the give-away. I can’t say for sure, but it certainly looks European, and in the Saigon of that era might be a Citroen…a taxi?
Not a Citroen but a Peugeot 403.
Wow!
Thanks…..now I’ll bet you’ll remember those diesel powered Mercedes taxi’s which smoked and vibrated so badly that passengers in that shaking back seat had to lean forward….filthy dirty piastres in hand, to get out asap.
Re: the car, you’re both wrong, it’s an Austin Westminster.
See:
http://mostodd.wordpress.com/2011/02/20/the-burning-monk/
http://www.famouspictures.org/mag/index.php?title=Burning_Monk
The car was saved and is on display at the Thien Mu Pagoda in Hue. I’ve personally been there and photographed it.
http://www.famouspictures.org/mag/images/9/94/Thich-Quang-Duc-s-car.jpg
Closeup of the nameplate:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fdm06/5020903866/
Background on the car:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austin_Westminster
Can anyone deny the author’s point that men are treated unfairly by American society in general?Justice denied one is justice denied all, and this country is no longer a country of laws because they are selectively enforced. The passage of Equal Opportunity and the “legality” of descrimination against white males in the workplace was only the beginning of our departure from our so-called “best judicial system in the world.”
And it has to be said, if you are a WHITE male, you are SOL.
I have a (white male) son who almost died after being stabbed in the back 7 times by a thug of a different race. A second minority assailant was punching him in the face, and there was an uninvolved impartial witness who identified both assailants.
This was not front page or any other page news. The police and DA’s office performed lackadaisical investigations and prosecution. The accomplice was not even charged. The prosecution’s big fear was the likelihood of a lone juror holding out for acquittal based
on race and two attempted murderers were granted probation in an insane alternate universe plea bargain.
When I saw which way the wind was blowing, I searched the DA website for links to advocacy groups. There were many seemingly overlapping groups for child abuse victims and female rape and abuse victims but NOT ONE for a hate crime in which the victim was a white male.
‘Nuff said.
Of course, I meant “discrimination” not “descrimination.” Aditionally, only the knife-wielding attempted murderer is suffering the inconvenience of probation. The 2nd assailant who provided the frontal distraction never even had the inconvenience of being charged and was unbelievably listed as a “credible witness” in the Keystone Cop’s incident report.
I am a lawyer, and thankfully I don’t practice family law, but I do have an interest and took a number of family law courses in school.
I read Mr. Ball’s letter. He makes two critical points that are being lost on most of us:
1. His wife called the authorities on him because she feared that if she did not, someone else would see her daughter’s cut lip and call the authorities on HER, and the state would take her children away.
Her fear of government intervention in her family forced her to sacrifice her husband to protect her children. When the state can take children away for a cut lip, parents are pushed to inform on each other to protect their children from the state.
2. Mr. Ball’s main point was that the police, courts, and child protection systems do not follow the constitution or a set of written law, but a nebulous set of policies and procedures that are not subject to any scrutiny.
He cites evidence that many of these policies are based on totally incorrect premises (arresting husbands will best prevent domestic problems) and ignore long term effects that harm families (arresting husbands often means wife and children become homeless). We were a nation of laws, but have become a nation of policies that are enforced on the whim of the police and courts. Mr. Ball is correct that these policies are written by special interest groups “to protect women” against fathers and husbands.
These two points are certainly political – Mr. Ball’s death should lead us to question how much power the state should have to invade the relationship between parents and children, and how to restructure our court system to return to being a nation of laws, not policies.
In the past 30 years, the power of the state over children and families has been massively expanded, and the use of procedures and policies instead of laws has come to dominate state actions.
We need to realize that when we give the government intrusive powers to “protect the children” we also give them the power to destroy families and lives without due process of law.
The word “whim” in your second point should be bold, underlined, and in LARGE CAPITAL LETTERS. After very limited contact as a bystander, I no longer trust our justice system. When the ballot says “Should Judge ___ be retained in office, I’m voting “NO” every time. Nobody should have the power wielded by our judges for more than a few years–that power is a strong corrupting agent.
p.s. It is not JUST males under attack; it is the family unit.
Believe me, Jay, I didn’t miss those points. Those are the main points I took from Ball’s letter. Threats from bureaucrats and government by regulatory fiat, rather than by constitutional limitations and our elected representatives — sound like any other federal and state agencies you can think of?
Just as the EPA is robbing us of our economic freedoms and transforming our lives, the “Second Set of Books” Thomas Ball refers to is the means by which the government wages its war on men.
It’s not done with explicit legislation. It’s done with the bureaucracies set up with social-interventionist portfolios, in response to vaguely defined “problems.”
Consider this. Would things really be worse today, if there were no federal Office on Violence Against Women? If all the bureaucratic arrangements and policies Ball writes about had never happened? Suppose instead that the laws on assault and battery simply applied as they always had before.
It was never OK to beat your wife or kids, after all. It’s not like the Violence Against Women Act changed whether it was prosecutable. What it changed was the bureaucratic rewards of having it reported and “processed.”
Has domestic violence increased or decreased since we built a bureaucracy and a Second Set of Books around it? It has increased, of course. Just as “hate crimes” skyrocket once they are defined, and “threats to the environment” multiply like a plague of locusts once an EPA is chartered.
Ball is right, and he made a very masculine point in his letter, with the First and Second Set of Books metaphor. Limited, negative, black-letter law — the First Set of Books — can be well suited to both sexes. It is punitive, not prophylactic. It isn’t a lifestyle concept. It’s a spare set of boundaries on civilized life, invoked in the breach as opposed to being administered on an intrusive, 24/7 basis.
The Second Set of Books — entailing prophylactic intervention in the lives of adults — is hell on men. Women can be deluded into thinking they will thrive under it (even though they are as badly served by it as men), but men recognize innately how it infringes on individual dignity and intellectual autonomy. Even if they can’t express it as well as Thomas Ball, their inner resistance to it is built into their natures.
One of the most terrible results of the prophylactic bureaucratization of human life is that it functions — very poorly — as a substitute for men and women understanding each other. I have to say, my mind lingered on the original slapping incident, and the opportunity the little girl’s mother had to talk with her husband later, and tell him she agreed the child needed to be disciplined, but slapping wasn’t the way. Why, oh why didn’t she know her husband better? Why didn’t she seem to care about him, or what SHE could do? — why didn’t she see it as possible to address this with him, with respect and understanding — and love? A relationship being a two-way street, why didn’t the two of them have this kind of bond? Didn’t she know he was a good man? Wasn’t it important to her to protect her home and her bond with him? How was it possible for her fear of a state bureaucrat to be greater than her care for her husband and her family unit?
The very essence of 20th-century progressivism is the setting up of rules by third parties in government, so that the people live by those rules without understanding, discretion, or judgment. And Ball is right once again: in domestic law (as in almost every other area), this is a war on men — but women and children are some of the chief casualties.
“How was it possible for her fear of a state bureaucrat to be greater than her care for her husband and her family unit?”
Simple.
If a third party reported the incident, the state could take her kids away from her and accuse her of neglect or failure to protect her daughter.
If she reported it, the state might take her husband away, but the kids would be safe with her and no one would question her parenting.
The system is encouraging spouses (wives at least) to betray their partners in order to retain their children.
Threats from bureaucrats and government by regulatory fiat, rather than by constitutional limitations and our elected representatives — sound like any other federal and state agencies you can think of?
It’s way past time to begin the de-bureaucratization of our government; we simply should not devote a single additional dime of our tax money to people who are paid not to think, but rather to follow “the rules” at all costs. The first action that should have been taken when the government ran out of money was to come in and let all these people go.
Jay, thanks for your comments; you’re spot on.
Thank you Jay – I think you are spot on!!
Nightelf – you are but a naive child, come back when you have actually raised a family.
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes ! You get it, Jay! I first read this story in a blog out of Israel! My heart broke for the man. He took the time to study his situation and realized the game was rigged, he couldn’t win. People, please focus on the main issue. We are not being ruled by law. The family is under attack, not men. The ‘man’ is the head of the family. You destroy the family by cutting off its head.
Your observations are so true. The laws as written, including constitutional limits, are mostly just fine actually. (I exclude many of the preemptive so-called “child protective” laws from this though).
They are written in proper gender neutral ways, and implicitly presume a due process of law. But that is not how the family courts administer them. Family Courts are rogue courts, that do pretty much whatever the judge feels like at their instant whim. Very little oversight, shoot from the hip, no time for anyone, expedient “due process”, and incredibly intrusive inquests and control over peoples intimate affairs.
All enforceable by imprisonment, fines, forfeitures, license revocations and everything else only imposable upon a defendant’s criminal acts.
Thomas Ball’s moniker of this fact, he called “The Second Set of Books”.
It is not how the laws are written, but how the Family Courts routinely ignore and violate them.
This article needs a contrarian opinion.
One: It takes a fist to the face to cut a child’s lip. That’s not anyones common definition of how to rear a child, thats how to hurt a child. Two: Guess how good the child feels now that her daddy was such an ass as to set fire to himself.
“One: It takes a fist to the face to cut a child’s lip.”
You’re wrong: a slap can do it. Is that too strong a correction? Yes. So was arresting him.
Not true. A backhand pop with a hand that’s wearing a ring can produce a cut – no matter how lightly applied. Not saying hitting a kid in the mouth is the best way to go (God gave kids bottoms for a reason!) but weird accidents happen all the time.
Someone who cannot even feel enough sympathy to refrain from deriding a man whose despair moved him to self-immolate should perhaps be more circumspect in his use of the word “ass.”
Get a grip. That’s the perfect liberal sob sister argument. You should be ashamed to use it.
A liberal is a future conservative who can’t see reality until he/she has PERSONALLY been mugged, in this case by the INjustice system.
‘Someone who cannot even feel enough sympathy to refrain from deriding a man whose despair moved him to self-immolate should perhaps be more circumspect in his use of the word “ass.”’
Let me rephrase that: Someone who cannot even feel enough sympathy to refrain from deriding a Palestinian whose despair moved him to blow up a pizzeria should perhaps be more circumspect in his use of the word “ass.”
> Let me rephrase that: Someone who cannot even feel enough sympathy to refrain from deriding a Palestinian whose despair moved him to blow up a pizzeria should perhaps be more circumspect in his use of the word “ass.”
So, Nightelf, you don’t see a moral difference between someone killing himself and someone killing a himself along with a crowd of people?
The goal of most arguments is to successfully depict someone’s argument as absurd. You don’t have to make it so easy for me, though.
As a clumsy adult, I have cut my lip by bumping into a door. Because behind the lip are these really sharp things called teeth which do a great job at slicing.
One: my daughter licks her lips, consequently they are dry and cracked. If she sneezes hard they will crack and bleed. You’re passing judgment without facts. We usually call that “leftism”.
Two: I don’t have to imagine because I know. My father hung himself when I was 8. Yes, I’m claiming moral superiority over you.
It’s a shame he chose to do this. It’s a travesty that the media harbors a double-standard in their treatment of men and women. It’s criminal what the family courts do to some men.
Let us use a scale (of justice?) here:
Cut lip vs. horrifying end of father and husband.
You decide.
Thank you. Now for those of you fixated on Ball’s “crime’ of slapping his daughter: you apparently stopped reading after that. Why are you wasting everyone’s time here?
I think it should be noted that the 4-year-old had no choice over whether her face was slapped and her lip busted. Ball made both violent decisions; the decision to harm her, and the decision to harm himself.
It sounds like what you’re saying is that no matter how much injustice you face it’s still your fault – that physical or spiritual retaliation is illegitimate. After all, if your family and property are confiscated by an overtly corrupt system – you’re sold into slavery – then the solution is just to shut up and take it, right? Thank you, sir, may I have another?
I suspect that in reality you just sympathize with the man-hating status quo.
Helen is right–it’s the blackout of the story that is the real news. And she is right–hitting a kid so her lip bleeds is not great, but it happens 10,000 times a day in a country of 300 million, and mothers do that and worse all the time, and it doesn’t deserve jail or anything like it.
The total withdrawal of empathy from divorced men seems to me similar to the state-sponsored total withdrawal of empathy from the Jews in Germany in the mid to late 1930s. The message of the state organs was, approximately, “It’s wrong to feel compassion for these vermin.” We have the same dynamic happening now, though from the unofficial shadow government that is feminist apparatchiks, and people are being trained to be indifferent. It’s the in-thing now to express no compassion for any divorced man. One well-known female blogger managed to claim that the man killed himself in order to harm his wife! The first order of business for us is to confront all such studied moral numbness and call it “evil” as it is.
“The road to Auschwitz was built by hatred, and paved with indifference.”
Well and sadly stated.
A man recently set himself on fire in Tunisia protesting unfair treatment and caused a revolution. The Media were in love with this man.
A man sets himself on fire in the US protesting unfair treatment and the story is suppressed. The Media hate this man.
I bet john didn’t call the Tunisian man an “ass” for setting himself on fire. And by the way john, you’re the ass here. It doesn’t take a fist to cut a lip. It could be a fist, but a slap, a bump, or other contact could do that as well. Just saying. And no, I don’t approve of any facial contact for physical punishment, with my 3 kids I either used a switch on their bare legs or a belt on their bottoms. They’ve turned out pretty good, I think, as one is a mechanical engineer, the other a sargeant in the 4thID, and the youngest is in college.
It’s amazing how liberals always want to blame the victim, unless it’s one of their favored minorities. Then, of course, it’s never their fault.
but femininists do write about how wretched the family court system is. Ariel Gore got caught up in it. She writes blistering essays about how wretched it is.
I honestly wonder how long the family court system, and, really, even child protective services, will survive. they are an artifact of a wealthy industrial country, which I don’t think we are, right now.
We have biographies of jane addams, the founder of the whole deal. Now that gays are out of the closet, someone, somewhere, is going to point out what an obnoxious user of girlfriends she was. that other gays behave decently, while she relied on the closet to hide her atrocious private behaviour. not the lesbian part- the use and mistreatment of her partners.
Add in, alumni of the system are probably not fans. If any of them grow up decent, they would possibly devote themselves to dismantling a cruel system.
The Black Book of communism has chapters on how communists snatched children, and sent them far away, for their own goods. Greek children were marooned in Poland, second-class citizens, denizens of foster homes- even though their parents earnestly sought them out and desired them at home, in Greece. I haven’t seen how our social workers losing children in care in New York, in Long Island, in Florida, are any different.
I get it. Separate and unequal is OK. It just depends on whom we are talking about.
Ths system is biased and everyone knows it. That couldn’t possibly have anything to do with the fact that young men are less likely to get married, could it?
Personally, this doesn’t have anything to do with me. I’m still happily married to my first and only wife. Our kids are all grown up and moved out. I guess I’m one of the lucky ones. Having never needed justice myself doesn’t disqualify me from wishing it for others, does it?
I think any court watcher will tell you that men and woman feel equally aggrieved by the limitations and inadequacies of the family court system. We have no-fault divorce just about everywhere, but when marriages fall apart, the parties want vindication. Unfortunately, the courts are not in the vindication business anymore. They also don’t do therapy. All they do is divide the assets.
I agree that media do cover issues differently, but it’s the coverage that’s the problem, not the lack of coverage. Regarding the “burning bed,” we should not be making a heroine of a woman who killed her husband instead of leaving him. Maybe she felt she had no choice–I think that’s the argument–but even if we think it’s true, we should not be looking to have that choice validated in the press. The legitimate course of action is to get a restraining order and move out, hard as that may be.
These extreme cases are not useful benchmarks for normal behavior. I think the woman in Texas who drowned her kids is also deemed sometimes to be a representative stressed mother. Thomas Ball’s actions are in this category. They’re symptomatic of mental imbalance, not legitimate responses to adversity. People who kill themselves in response to problems that can be fixed are in a class by themselves.
re: The Burning Bed – this is not a contemporary movie. It came out 27 years ago. Why is it useful to compare a movie made in 1984 to an event that occurred recently? Perhaps a more interesting exercise would be to see if such a movie would be made today, or if such an act would be covered the way it was 30 years ago.
I agree. I was responding to the citation in the article itself. I think the Texas woman may be a more useful parallel, and, although I don’t follow these horror stories closely, because it seems prurient, I think the coverage was a lot more balanced. Just guesssing–what do you think:
Michelle, as far as the coverage being more balanced, the coverage of the Yates case would not have been as extensive had she killed herself instead of her children.
I agree with your first comment and think it was well-stated. I don’t think it’s particularly useful to use these outliers (such as Ball and Yates) as being representative. I used your comment as a jumping off place for a general remark.
A man who drowned his children would have been executed no matter what his excuse.
Right you are…the lying tramp Susan Smith is still living proof of that. Even if her South Carolina neighbors wanted to get their hands on her.
Would you believe a charge of ‘Felony Spanking’, without the cite ?
http://www.volunteertv.com/national/headlines/Mom_pleads_guilty_to_spanking_own_child_124072014.html
We are approaching the end of ‘The Crazy Years’ which will be followed by
some years of ‘Civil Unrest’ ending in the establishment of a much more
conservative social order; I am not saying that women will have to wear
hats outside the home, as a sign of their second class citizenship, or
that they will lose the right to vote, but the nuclear family, the
father figure, and a reluctance on the part of the State to interfere
between husband and wife will once more be the norm _because_ that is
the only way for a society to function when it does not have unlimited
discretionary income to spend on women’s wish fulfillment daydreams.
I have to agree with Guzzipete when he compares Family Court judges to Goodfellas. For those too dainty for bad language, that’s how mobsters talk.
In today’s America, our government is nothing but extortion. Our ruling class Elites are corrupt and incompetent, incompetent at everything except stealing. They’re really good at stealing. They have plenty of goons and thugs with badges: ATF, DOJ, IRS, DEA and countless SWAT teams to kick down your door, and TSA to check your papers at every border crossing. Even the Dept of Education has SWAT teams now !
My country has become East Germany. Land of the Free! Not anymore!
Fathers’ rights advocates can be as obnoxious as feminists.
This guy is hardly father of the year – why make a martyr out of him? He took the ultimate path for wimping out on his responsibilities.
It’s an unimportant story about a loser.
Comment by yet another pathetic loser who knows nothing and feels nothing.
We’re supposed to feel sympathy for that moron?
How many kids have you raised? If your answer is more than zero, I’m going to strongly suspect you’re lying.
Amen, and I raised four
Don’t bother you aren’t even beyond happiness yet. Sympathy or rather empathy is way beyond you for the moment.
You can’t feel anything if you all you ever do is try and dissolve unpleasant emotions with happiness.
Here are my boots, walk a mile, and don’t worry I’ve got another pair.
Bull. Citations, please?
Deny as you will, you unimportant loser, this is one more effect of the cancer that is feminism. It is unsustainable, though, and will die as the country continues to decline…
-It’s an unimportant story about a loser.-
I forget who said it, but there is a phrase that comes to mind, “When people have nothing left to lose, they lose it.”
This man had lost just about everything that makes life worth living. Yes, in the narrowest sense of the word, that makes him a loser, I suppose.
I would like to ask, however, if you think that you are so far evolved beyond this unfortunate lost soul that you think this could NEVER happen to YOU.
I cannot imagine a circumstance where I would leave my children or stop fighting for them or stop providing for them as long as I was able and they need me.
I think this man’s act of self-immolation was selfish, narcissistic, pathetic and psychotic.
Using this man as a symbol for fathers’ rights is a public relations disaster that will convince no one of the need for fathers’ rights in the courts. In fact, it will do the opposite.
Right, basically a long winded version of “Tough sh*t. Suck it up and GIVE ME MY MONEY B****!”
Human breaking points don’t matter – If he does anything but remain a meek slave that does nothing but impotently whine in the corner, he is to be condemned.
- Kill the people tormenting him? He was a “selfish, violent crazy person”.
- Kill himself instead of others? He was a “selfish, narcissistic, pathetic [crazy person].”
If this was a woman there would be compassion and understanding.
But, because it’s a man there is none. Only the proverbial beat-down, verbal and otherwise.
My fervent wish is that everyone that has no empathy, understanding or mercy, also get none.
Funny that our “victims” must come with clean hands but the second someone in other, preferred “victim” groups is wronged, their own part in it is overlooked.
The man isn’t ideal, but there’s a big gap between that and invalidating his experience and criticism of a broken system.
Summing up: Because he was, I’ll go so far as to say, a bad guy, he doesn’t deserve sympathy. I see your logic, wrong as it is.
He did the wrong type of protest. Killing yourself is the way women protest, not men. What he should have done is to kill the family court judge, and anybody else connected with the case that screwed him, and THEN kill himself. THAT would have had the media all over the story.
richard40,
Actually, that is not how women protest. Women typically talk about or attempt suicide with pills, poisoning, or some other less “messy” way of killing themselves. Men kill themselves at a higher rate than women by 4 to 1. Men often use a weapon or like this guy, a means that is more lethal to themselves. It shows his self-restraint that the did not harm others–and that is a good thing. Yet, as you point out, he would have gotten more media attention–but he chose not to do that and took his life to make a point, but not anyone else’s.
Ball was simply acting out the violence he felt had been perpetrated against him by the system.
What the powers-that-be don’t seem to understand is that folks who have no conventional means to make themselves heard will find ways to do so. Violence is a kind of final expression of felt wrongs, in society as well as in war. Clausewitz said that war is politics by other means. What many don’t understand is that the reverse is also true. Politics is war by other means, just as violent, but in other, easier to disguise ways. The violence is always there. Only distributed in broad, soft ways. Small cuts that accumulate both in the well-being and in the memories of those affected.
The accumulation of cuts beyond a critical number is what makes for revolutionary times.
What really went on in the Ball family we will never know.
I am struck by how similar that argument (that the poor bloke was driven to torch himself) is to the excuse of the left for the 9/11 attackers: that American imperialism drove them to it.
Elf, if the 9/11 attackers had killed only themselves, you would have a point. They didn’t, and you don’t.
Suicide doesn’t just harm the one who kills himself, it harms all around him. What I was referring to was the whiny, narcissistic mindset, the blaming one’s problems on everyone except himself.
“elf,” we get it that the guy made a bad choice to commit suicide, really, but unlike you we’re focusing on the larger issue of how men fare in family court. You’ve proven yourself to be an obstinate fool.
Marriage is not the good bargain for men it used to be. Those who get married today are fools. There is a better than even chance it will end in a divorce and the man will be forced to make payments to his wife under threat of imprisonment that will leave him impoverished. If the marriage does stay together, the chances that you will still have access to sex after a decade or two are slim to none.
Until the laws and policies and the behavior and attitudes of women are changed back to something resembling the conditions of a century ago men should just walk away from marriage. It is an ancient institution that has changed to the point that no one from the 19th Century would recognize it.
Young men, spend your money on yourself. Buy a big TV, a game system, and a sports car. If you need sex, learn seduction and only engage in short term sex focused relationships. There are plenty of good looking young women who are only looking for a good time. Get comfortable lying to women about your long term relationship goals, they have always done it to us, because it is the best way to get sex from quality women as you get older.
Marriage is a bargain. Right now it is a good one for women and a bad one for men. If you get married the chances that you will be sorry you did it some time in the future are much higher than the chance that you will happily ever after.
Buyer beware.
And then young women wonder why so many young men are “going Galt” on marriage. When they see what happened to Dad, or Uncle Rick or Mr. Jones, the gym teacher, it’s pretty hard to make the case for putting their heads in the guillotine, and trusting sweety pie not to pull the cord.
Are there really feminists? I mean, they tout equality between the sexes, that gender is irrelevant, but when it comes to equality of conditions in implementing their gender neutral social construct it never seems to apply to them. The girls are still banned from combat units, there is no affirmative action draft to equalize the playing field between boys and girls, and the split tailed feminists are still exempt from Selective Service registration. Only the boys suffer civil penalties for not signing up for the emergency national staff roster for the military. 99 percent of the current war casualties are males in a target rich environment that excludes females who are supposed to have skin in the game (ditto for casualties in civilian law enforcement). Where is that feminist Title Nine version for the military (or law enforcement) providing equal dying for equal pay for the girls? Looks to me like the feminists only want to be baby killers when it comes to there own abortions and leave the post natal collateral baby killing to the males.
‘Feminism is THE premier hate cult in America today.
Read this to learn more.
Yes, Virginia/don, there really are feminists.
But what they’re after isn’t “equality” or “equity,” it’s female supremacy and entitlements. Equality I can live with — and I grew up when we did have equality under the law and, certainly, before God — but we’ve thrown out the law, and replaced it as other posters have suggested by equity/equality policies and arbitrary measures to favour women, no matter what their actions. Being female and, therefore, a constant victim according to the feminist canon, trumps fairness and justice.
This is the post-Christian world we live in: a Godless and deranged dystopia. And who are the ultimate losers?
Our children.
Marsha Linehan, a well-known writer about the extremely ill people known as “borderlines” wrote something that sheds light on this. She said–and this is from decades of specializing in suicidal patients–approximately, “Thoughts of suicide are natural and to be expected when the level of stress is high enough. At a certain level of stress, thoughts of suicide are natural.”
Anyone who demeans this man as being a weakling is showing that he or she is not bothering to understand Thomas Ball’s level of stress. It’s painful to read his statement and feel what his position was. He interpreted his situation as being inescapable. No one can say he was wrong about that. No one on this list of commenters can tell me they were ready to step up and give this man hope. No one on this list can tell me the number of the hotline that a despairing father in the grip of a merciless court can call for help. No such number exists. That’s what Thomas James Ball was saying with his last action, and he was calling on us who survive him to step up and do something about it.
I’m not saying the system is fair to men, I’m not saying the guy didn’t have a legitimate complaint. Obviously he’d been screwed by the courts. But as conservatives we have to uphold certain values. Character matters. You don’t hit 4 year olds and you don’t wimp out by depriving the kid of a father. EIther we’re going to assert that we have values despite the stresses we have to face in our lives, or we take the liberal way and declare everybody a victim overwhelmed by the impersonal forces of society. I feel sorry for the guy, but in the end we do have responsibility for our actions. Don’t blame it on the feminists in the same way the feminists blame everything on men. Part of character is being able to handle stress.
If you’re a conservative, I’m Cary Grant.
And exactly why is refusing to blame your problems on everybody else not a conservative value?
Are all of one’s problems always one’s own fault?
Yes, all of 0one’s problems is one’s fault. That is what personal responsibility is .
Driving to work this morning there was a country music song on the radio. Some man had done some woman wrong, and in retaliation, she was going to key his car, take out the headlights with a basball bat, then wait for him at home with her shotgun to show him what he done was wrong… baby, oh yeah. Or words to that effect. Apparently this song has many fans. I wonder how long the song would be allowed to play on the radio if the genders were reversed.
We’ll always have “Hey Joe”…
; )
Xanthippe, you might think about it this way:
The man had decided he could not help his children any more. He may have said to himself, “I am so distressed, I will be mostly poison to them. How will it improve their lives if I am put in jail? It will hurt them, yet the courts will not lay off. They have hurt my children already, and now they are going to hurt them again by putting me in jail. The courts and the bureaucrats have ruined my children’s lives, and I can do nothing to repair those lives. This is going to go on forever. I can at least spare my children the embarrassment of seeing their father put in jail. If I sacrifice myself, now, to call attention to this, perhaps some other children, decades from now, after the Reform has happened, will be better off.”
If you think there was something he could do, Xanthippe, that you could think of but he did not, pray tell us what it is. If your answer is merely “Something” you haven’t read his statement.
JohnMag, you have answered your own question. If you would just read what you wrote, that whiny narcissistic complaint you put in the mouth of the guy–THAT is what’s wrong with his attitude and his bizarre demise. He probably actually thought that way. Can’t you see how screwed up that attitude is? how it is the exact opposite of conservative principles? How could he possibly think that the children would be more damaged by him being in jail than having to live with the knowledge of his suicide? Only narcissism would explain it. The total disregard of other’s feelings and fixation on the self. The absurd notion that by his gruesome death he’s going to improve the situation for others. Pure self-delusion.
Or it actually COULD be, some injustices are simply too grievous to allow without death.
I personally, in the face of certain death, will never:
A) Be robbed without resistance
B) Murder an unarmed, non-threatening person
C) Witness a murder, rape, or robbery without intervening
D) Allow my wife or child to be physically man-handled in my presence
E) Serve any prison sentence due to actions occuring during the above.
The list is probably alot longer if I gave it more thought, but there are indeed SOME things that a Free Man simply cannot allow to transpire so long as there is breath in his lungs.
“I will DIE before I….” isnt just an abstract.
Its the actual, physical, price of FREEDOM
Some are willing to pay upon demand, others are not.
Amen.
Thank you, Nightelf, for answering JohnMag. I agree with your response.
A man of character whose children were important to him would not have done this thing; could not have done this thing. As far as what he could have done? Put his energies to better use, like how about being gainfully employed, or spending the money he was using to sue everybody around, send it to the ex-wife for child support, or on retraining for himself to better his financial situation, or even perhaps spending some on therapy for himself – he surely could have used that.
Using him as the poster child for the fathers’ rights movement is a terrible idea. Defending his actions as though he had no alternatives is a terrible idea. This was not the act of a rational father nor a man of great character.
I suppose, at the risk of taking up too much space, I should respond to the literal interpretation of your question:
He should have not hit the kid in the first place. Having done that he should have shown contrition, thrown himself on the mercy of the court, even if he didn’t feel that contrite. He should serve time, if he had to, but he probably wouldn’t have had to, and try to reestablish contact with his family. He could have remarried and had other kids and vowed to learn from his mistakes and he could have come to understand that life isn’t fair, the courts aren’t always fair and love is where you find it. He could, to put it another way, simply decided to live like a decent human being.
This guy Ball just strikes me as a violent nut.
He was a military vet, which suggests he was quite strong physically; he had a 4-year-old daughter — someone very small and weak compared to him; while trying to put her to bed, he objected to her “licking his hand”; instead of simply taking his hand away and letting her go to sleep (which any even moderately normal parent, relative, babysitter, or child care worker would do), HE HIT THIS VERY SMALL CHILD IN HER FACE SO HARD THAT SHE STARTED BLEEDING. At bedtime, no less.
Yet somehow he thinks HE’s the one who deserves sympathy.
Anyone who believes this type of extreme violence is acceptable from a grown man or woman toward any child under any circumstances — much less a child who is maybe 1/5th the adult’s size — needs to have their own head examined.
If something as innocuous and non-threatening as his daughter’s behavior that evening could set this guy off that violently, there’s no telling what he would do to her — or what weapons he might use against her — if she actually did something wrong. IMO his children are well rid of him.
War against men and boys, my *ss. What an idiotic column and POV.
One of the worst things you can do to your children is to kill yourself. I therefore find myself incapable of seeing this man as an icon for anything to do with fatherhood.
I do agree that the coverage blackout is a major media double standard. But then, I would find extensive coverage of a women immolating herself over being unable to get an abortion absurd.
Now that I’ve read his final letter, as a supporter of strengthening rights for fathers I can only hope that the media continues to ignore this story.
(1) He slapped the four year old hard enough to cut her lip because she licked his hand at bedtime. Contrary to what some have written, that is not normal. If you do this to your own children, you need to enroll in an anger management class immediately.
(2) He wouldn’t, by his own description, lift a finger to work out his marriage and find out why his wife had called the police.
(3) He wouldn’t comply with the most basic family court requirements for reunification with his children. (A judge requesting that a parent have one or two sessions with a counselor to determine that the parent is not a danger is not terribly unreasonable.)
(4) He repeatedly calls on other men to commit arson.
(5) He commits suicide in a public and spectacularly gruesome fashion.
This man is not the poster boy for anything, certainly not fatherhood or the rights of men and boys. I’ll take any one of the thousands of men with character who have been wronged by the system over this egomaniac.
Absolutely right on. Thank you.
No, thanks, we’ll take him.
For next generation of young men that are finally sick of getting kicked in the teeth for the sex they were born as, he is a powerful messenger.
He was not perfect, as a father and otherwise, but his warrior nature strikes chord.
Which is why this event is being supressed.
Smart.
Hi Helen,
thanks for the article. At least there is one decent woman willing to speak up!
As a man who was suicidal. I was amazed at the hatred expressed to me when I was. I was amazed at the indifference to me when I was. I have put in 3.5 years to stop the Thomas Balls of the World. I have released the book to do so. Link below. I am now rolling out the good news for men. And women and manginas are hating on me for doing so.
Below are links to facebook threads where women are hating on me for standing up for my rights and the rights of men like Thomas Ball.
All are welcome to join these facebook links and tell people what Helen says ‘NO…men will not be treated like crap any more’.
http://www.crimesagainstfathers.com/australia/Forums/tabid/82/forumid/1/threadid/223/scope/posts/Default.aspx
http://www.facebook.com/MichaelLukesArmy/posts/219230604784361
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_202699683093973&id=227376997292908
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_202699683093973&id=228421717188436
This article is a remarkable opportunity to correct the apparent oceans of point-missers. Let’s assume Mr. Ball is Hitler. Ok, done. Is it even possible that there are any other relevant facts? I suggest the answer is yes, and it’s these points Ms. Smith is exploring.
The court and his ex-wife may have been wrong but his kids will have to live with this painful memory. Will his kids get over it easily? I doubt it.
The idea that women get favorable treatment by the law and in the press is probably true but it is a recent phenomenon and probably unlikely to last. If the economic situation turns severe as seems likely then people may not be able to rely on the government as provider. We may find the male traits that seem like shortcomings now will be seen as strengths in the future.
Most rational comment here. No bashing, no self pity.
If the economic situation turns severe as seems likely then people may not be able to rely on the government as provider.
Agreed. And this day cannot come too soon! Government should never be the avenue of first resort when someone is in a crisis; the options of family, friends, and church (or private charity) should all be explored first.
We seem to be bumping up against the conservative core value that life is tough, but you have to suck it up, be tough, be smart. If you lose your job, find another one; if you lose your wife, deal with it.
I was lucky (or was it smart and tough?) enough to get through it and win in some sense, although at times, I felt the kind of despair that led this guy to kill himself. I got custody of the kids. Mothers are not the only ones who can have strong relations with their kids. Every situation is different, so I will not try to generalize beyond what I have said. In my case, I realized early on from my wife’s lawyer, that certain things were stacked in her favor, but there were other things that weren’t, and finally by making the correct plan, paying whatever I had to for lawyers and counselors, playing my cards better than she played hers, and being fortunate enough to have other things fall into place, I got the kids and got to pay the half I owed to her in terms I could live with. GETTING CUSTODY, or at least not losing it, is so important, but it seems that most men might not even want that, because then, what would they do with the kids?
Is it more “manly” to be a lone wolf dad, or a dad raising the kids?
Because one has an idea about what the role of the husband father should be in society, does not mean than one can actually play the role required. One can also be in despair because one senses that one cannot play the role required. An earlier poster talked about a number of things which he would never submit to, strongly implying that he would die before he submitted to them. Dying, and depriving your kids of your presence, especially when it has nothing to do with defending them or some related value (and in fairness to the previous poster, I’m not sure such was the case) should be something which even the half-healthy mind should flee.
But yes, it was better that he killed just himself, rather than taking the rest with him.
The thing is, men don’t want to be cossetted or told what pitiable losers they are. Especially if they *are* pitiable losers.
Same in New Zealand only 99.9% of the so called Men and their FAMILIES Movement are supporting the GOVT lead destruction of our **Whole Natural Biological FAMILIES** thru ignorance and fraud from within – Onward:)_Jim
I found Thomas Ball’s letter depressing in the extreme. Worse, given the level
of bureaucratic craziness in America today, I don’t see a solution. Men are brutalized by The System.
There was a time it was women. Sometimes, it’s just a lone individual.
Like the TSA inspecting the damp adult diaper of a ninety plus year old dying woman to make certain she’s not a terrorist, we have no capacity any longer for “appropriate” responses, for common sense.
At the other end of the spectrum, women *are* still brutalized by men inside the footprint of America, but on the Indian reservations.
Here’s a depressing account from the other end of the stick:
http://harpers.org/archive/2011/02/0083300
The craziness in America exceeds this issue. ….which does not make it any less sad, or tragic. ….Lady in Red
What?? Hahahaha. Women were never brutalized by the system. For thousands of years they’ve just gotten to sit back with the kids while the men were out dying, killing, or breaking their backs to build civilization. Everything we use every day was conceived and built by men. You think if you went back in time and talked to women that they’d jump at the chance to work in mines or armies or ships or factories instead of staying safe at home all day? No. It’s only now that MEN have created such abundance tough labor is rarely neccessary that females suddenly want a piece of the action. Now they can sit in air conditioned rooms filling female quotas in government positions where they get paid for attendance, while their men work 99% of the remaining dirty and dangerous jobs and get rewarded by losing their children and 2/3 of their earnings.
History is marked by AD and BC. Women’s History is marked by BK and AK. The secret fact. Before a disposable female “sanitary” napkin “K” was commercially available, women used cloth. They used and washed them. Get real. A wo-man didn’t want to be out of the house all day every day during her period because of that. Everything changed AK when disposable K was available. It wasn’t males keeping fe-males homebound so lighten up on that. I’m a woman and know the facts.
sorry. Didn’t mean the comment “lighten up” for goldenfetus but it sounded that way after I clicked send… I meant it for the fe-males who blame men for things not their fault. And, yes, it was men who did the building planning working that make our country great… and when needed, the Molly Pitchards step in and load the cannons when their soldier husbands were killed on the job. We too have wonderful abilities… but must intelligently apply our skills, not just try to prove something stupid by taking men’s jobs. Unfortunately some fe-males are now the employees who pushed their way into jobs via government laws provided by vote hungry politicians, and block others with better abilities from doing the jobs. Remember the diapered astro-naught roving eye mom as a prime example. Mothers with working husbands left their post at the home door protecting their children and homes so they could be and do something “important” “fulfilling” in the world… because they were brainwashed and deceived. The most important value a woman can express if she is a mom, is to be one, and that is a 24/7 job and the most difficult if done right. Unmarried women rightly value themselves in their jobs and contributions to their businesses and our country. Sounds like I think a woman’s place is in the home. No. But a mom’s is, if she doesn’t need to bring home the bacon too.
Okay, 37 posts before this, and none addressed the main points I want to make.
Main points I wish to make:
(1) Suicide for the sake of a making a cause more well known is not a mode of political protest Americans respect at all.
(2) I suspect that as a form of suicide Americans find self-immolation more distasteful than any other, and are less likely to cover it for that reason.
There were political suicides, self-immolation, during the View Nam War era. The ones by the Buddhist monks in Viet Nam got big play, but that was just a form of macabre curiosity of a cultural sort in a practice more common in the East. How can we say that? Because when a few Americans committed self-immolation in America, including a Quaker Dad holding his baby (the baby was saved), it got little play and no respect as a political message.
A recent suicide that resulted in massive political messages was the GW bridge jump of Tyler Clementi, a confused and homosexually promiscuous boy-man, in his initial months of the immoral chaos at a modern American University, Rutgers. Tyler’s intent was not to leave a grand political message, his slapping-out at others via suicide was directed at a smaller and more personal circle. The faddish modern culture of homosexual activism amped up the political message of his suicide, beyond the intent of his note.
I know my own principle with regards suicide notes is that they are best left unread, expect for those officially investigating the death. It’s a healthy principle. Suicide is an insane, immoral act, and the note, as a fruit of that act is a hazard to morals, morale and sanity to try and make sense of.
Still, the scaring of the sidewalk was extraordinary, I do not think that those forces malevolent to males which pass over that courthouse entryway day-by-day will not soon forget what happened there that day and why.
If you kill yourself publicly in support of or as a supporter of communism, feminism, homosexuality, egalitarianism, or any of the other far left monstrosities then you are a sacred messianic victim and will be covered to death by the Jewish media.
If you’re a straight White male you’re a criminal psychopath. Just look at this Thomas Ball character. Who do you think has to clean up his burn spot? What an inconsiderate oppressor!
The point is that the forces governing America are hostile and fully intend to destroy Western civilization forever. The media is controlled by the state, whether it seems to be so or not.
“(1) Suicide for the sake of a making a cause more well known is not a mode of political protest Americans respect at all.
(2) I suspect that as a form of suicide Americans find self-immolation more distasteful than any other, and are less likely to cover it for that reason.”
You do not know your history: During the Vietnam War Immolating Buddhist Monks were played up by the media and became one of the motivating acts for the anti-war protests. The importance of Mr. Ball’s self-immolation for American Society will be determined by the media and how hard it pushes his suicide.
This was perhaps one of the most pointed stories I’ve read about the cruelty of the family law system. This man was brilliant, a talented spokesperson and a great writer. His talents could have been best employed by becoming a representative for slighted fathers all around the country.
Mr. Ball commited the sin of being a uncompromising parent. There are precious few left–in large part because the legal system is likely to hose you at the first opportunity.
I encourage those who understand and sympathise with Mr. Ball to become involved in state politics regarding family law and work to change the system. It may take many years but it has to start somewhere. This is as good a time as any. Otherwise, it may be your grandchildren that are going to go though this very same scenario.
You must have read a different piece than the one I did. This man was a nutcase from day one.
What does Misandry mean?
Google ‘The Misandry Bubble’ to answer that question.
What does ‘misandry’ mean?
> We’re supposed to feel sympathy for that moron?
> I feel sorry for the guy…
Why don’t we stage a debate between nightelf and nightelf?
I can feel sympathy for criminals and sleazoids as fellow humans at the same time I realize the nature of their dishonesty and see the need to restrain them from doing damage to children. I certainly don’t sympathize with the guy’s pathetic, self-referential sob story.
I’ve been married 30+ years – long enough to eject 3 kids from the house and end up with a half-dozen grandkids. I stayed married in no small part because I told Wife, who threatened me with divorce every other week during some temper tantrum or another, in no uncertain terms that if she did divorce me she would never see a penny of child support from me. Ever. No matter what some damned judge said and no matter what jail time I had to do. I meant it; she had the wisdom to believe it.
What a prince! You showed her.
No point in making it easy for her. I helped raise my kids. I’m still married. Guess it worked, huh?
If I get miffed at her I have to think twice about the damage to my finances and the neverending suck involved in dealing with attorneys and family court before I walk out the door. It’s good to give the other side something to think about, too.
Divorce is too easy. If we want less of it we need to make it more difficult.
Have a good ‘un, princess.
In this context “uncompromising” might be a bad thing. In order to build a marriage you’ve got to compromise a lot and from reading that fellow’s complaint he seems too full of himself to be able to do that. But, though I think that men are getting the short end of the stick in these situations, I see that the main problem is the enormous amount of interference by government in the lives of the poor. Dysfunctional families are dangerous to children’s health, mental and physical. Liberals have taken on the responsibility of protecting those children with all kinds of assistance and interference in their lives to an extent never dreamed of 100 years ago. But the result of all that nanny-state interference is to foster and promote dysfunctionality. They make it worse. From Ball’s testimony, the family had fallen into a morass of angry and hurt feelings and non-communication. The kids were acting out with bizarre behavior. This kind of situation is ripe for government intervention. As Brendan Behan once said: There is no human situation so miserable it can’t be made worse by the presence of a policeman.” (or Social Worker or psychologist. he could have added.) Just look as a few episodes of “The First 48″ on A&E…you can see the devastation liberal policies have wreaked on poor black communities.
The point is to stay clear of the legal system and the welfare system. The Ball family failed to do that. We can’t know exactly what happened, who was more to blame, if anybody. But we can see that they allowed themselves through inattention and narcissism to open themselves to be invaded by the forces of darkness and lives were destroyed in the process. There are a lot of maybes here. Maybe if the Balls had been more mature, if Ball had been sure about whom he married or she him, if he had handled his problems more adroitly. One can feel sorry for him, and we know the legal system is unfair and unjust. Its a soulless machine. But I don’t think we have to take the liberal tack and say that these people were just victims, without responsibility or agency, dumb puppets caught in the web of an unjust system. We cannot wallow in victimhood; that’s what liberals do.
There’s little difference in this tragic event and the liberal’s view on how to hold conservatives to a “higher standard” than they declare for themselves.
We used to sum it up in the military, “One Aw Sh*t can wipe out a hundred Atta Boys”
So goes the condemnation of his giving his daughter a fat lip. Certainly, it’s wrong, but to a lib, it’s better that she grow up to be a whore.
So goes the world.
“So goes the condemnation of his giving his daughter a fat lip. Certainly, it’s wrong, but to a lib, it’s better that she grow up to be a whore.”
Maybe you’d like to explain how a 4-year-old licking her father’s hand at bedtime is indicative of future whorishness.
Un-freaking-believable.
Sounds like a reasonable statement to me. The hand-licking won’t make her a whore, but the lack of discipline and masculine presence/attention in her life certainly will. Have you met any young ladies in, say, the last decade?
Wow. Just, wow. So every little girl is just a whore waiting to happen unless her father smacks her around and busts her lip on occasion.
This is sickening stuff, man.
I say “discipline and masculine presence/attention in her life” and YOU translate that into smacking her around and busting her lip. You’re the sick one here – so blinded by your misandry that you automatically equate fathers/discipline with abuse.
Yes, he did do that. No, it wasn’t the end of the world. I’m a hardcore atheist but “spare the rod, spoil the child” is just common sense to anyone living in the real world. He went to far, certainly – but now that little girl will have no father. Which is the greater evil?
And yes, females without strong, present, positive male role models become whorish. I think this is obvious to anyone in the mating market.
If your daughter or son is going to walk into the street, or stick something into an electric socket, I can see where one might whack them for their own good, (been there, done that) but if the point is for them to learn obedience to authority, as in “when I tell you to stop licking my hand, you’d better stop licking it, or I’ll show you (for your own good of course)” there comes a short circuit between the core value of need for obedience to parental authority and a parent being an out-of-control, authority CRAVING bully.
I did not have the stomach or patience to read the guy’s whole rant, and I know that difficult kids can push difficult parents in ways that as a parent of two spirited, but relatively easy-to-manage sons, I may not be able to understand, but hitting a four-year-old daughter because she won’t stop licking your hand, and not just spanking her, but hitting her in the face, tells me a lot about this guy.
The point is to stay clear of the legal system and the welfare system.
In other words, a man should not marry or have children.
The state has found out that it can operate by offering freebies to the more gullible and less intelligent gender (women), easily bribing women into destroying their husband and children in return for short-term profit.
some men (and women) here get it. we men must dam the liberal statist machine and just lead. our women will follow if we just lead. hell, our women will work harder than we will if we will just show them the way. just look at palin and bachmann. i’ll bet a large sum that it is their men, their fathers, their husbands, that have shown them the truth and that they are happy to carry the ball into the public arena for their families and the rest of us.
all my life i’ve been told by liberal society that it is wrong for men to lead. it was passe or neanderthal or too old school christian. finally, i realized i had to lead my family out of the leftist immoral morass. no one else was going to do it. yes, it meant i had to risk divorce. to lead is to risk everything in this society. if the state moves to crush you, resist, in the smartest, most efficient way you can muster. resist with the fiber of your being.
to all men out there. you’ve got to do it. determine what is right and lead your family to the promised land. if you truely lead from the best place in you, your family will follow.
Those who can lead, should, but just because you happen to be a man and/or a husband does not give you automatic power to lead. A certain percent of the males and female in society don’t have the capacity to lead anyone, and at least some of them would really like to be able to lead someone. A in all of life, the proof is in the doing.
By the way, doesn’t the patriarchy demand capital letters? I do, and I tried to re-enforce their usage in those over whom I had authority. Consider youraelf sent to bed with no supper.
I completely understand this man’s impotent frustration at the family court, though I do not endorse his response. I, also, got ‘screwed’ by the courts having been physically and emotionally abused by my wife for 20 years, I left my home in an effort to ask for help for our marriage and family. My wife’s response was to file a protective order against me alleging physical and sexual abuse, neither of which was true. As a result I had no communication with my children for four years, one for seven years. I also had to endure 27 weeks of exquisitely ironic anger management counseling. Now my relationship to my children has been completely restored, better, in fact than it ever was. I am a Christian with a solid understanding of God’s sovereignty. I got through realizing that the judge, the anger management counselor, and even my abusive wife were ultimately all subject to divine providence. At the time I didn’t understand the injustice, the unfairness, but had faith that God had a purpose in it for me. Now that I have been’ married eight years to the most wonderful woman in the world, I am beginning to understand that my years of pain prepared me for the years of joy I now am experiencing. I am sorry Thomas Ball took things into his own hands and was thus unable to see the possibility that God could restore ‘the years the locusts had eaten.
Glad you came out on the other side.
Some of the responses here are absolutely hilarious because they are made by people who clearly have never been married or raised children.
Other people commenting here are defending a system that they make a living from.
While excoriating Mr. Ball they somehow manage to avoid mentioning that they derive a financial benefit from processing people like Mr. Ball.
You know who you are. One guy especially I suggest you change your handle. None of you guys are arguing in good faith. You are defending a system that imposes misery because you profit from it.
Follow the money people and it becomes clear what is really going on.
The police have a financial incentive to arrest someone (usually the man) in a DV call.
The state has a financial incentive to put the children in care
The state has a financial incentive to compel counselling.
The state has a financial incentive to imprison the parent (usually the man).
Where does this money come from? Well the VAWA funds mandatory arrest. No arrest no money.
http://family.findlaw.com/domestic-violence/federal-domestic-violence-legislation.html
The Act reads: VAWA 1994: (1) To implement mandatory arrest or pro-arrest programs and policies in police departments, including mandatory arrest programs and policies for protection order violations (Part U, SEC. 2101). This act has had a profound effect on state laws governing domestic abuse.
Sec. 102. Grants to encourage arrest and enforce protection orders improvements.
Reauthorized at $75 million annually 2007 – 2011. States and localities use this funding to develop and strengthen programs and policies that encourage police officers to arrest abusers who commit acts of violence or violate protection orders.
Purpose Area changes—
(1) Adds the four crimes of violence against women: domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking;
(2) Changes “mandatory arrest” to “pro-arrest”;
(3) Adds language encouraging protocols and training to avoid dual arrest;
(4) Permit the use of GTEAEP funding to support Family Justice Centers;
(5) Adds new sexual assault provisions allowing training of criminal justice system
(6) Permits the use of GTEAEP funding to maintain local protection order registries
GTEAEP has a new HIV testing provision. GTEAEP grantees will lose 5 percent of their funding if they do NOT certify that their laws and policies allow HIV testing of indicted defendants. However, such testing must only occur at the request of the victim.
What many people (Nightelf being one) do not understand is the complete helplessness that this man was experiencing. When people commit suicide to hurt others, the suicide note is usually, “Now that I’m gone, Thanks for making me do this. You made my life miserable ….”. The note is vindictive. It’s childish. That’s not the case here.
This suicide wasn’t like that. He selected the most painful and visible way to die possible. Humans have an almost primordial aversion to fire. Self-Immolation is done to make sure that the sight of watching someone burn to death is permanently etched into the memory of all witnesses. This man wrote exactly what drove him to suicide. He articulated the exact chain of events in the most concise way he knew how. The suicide was intended to draw attention to his plight and that of other men like him. The questions that people are asking are not what this is meant to cause. The question he wanted to inspire was, “What did this man have to endure that self-immolation was the only act he had left? How broken is our System that this is a possible outcome? How many others are affected like this?”
He was human. He was fallible. He made many mistakes as I’m sure that everybody in the world has. But when a man’s entire life can be destroyed because of one incident, done in anger, there is something desperately wrong with the system. (To everyone saying “He was an abuser”, you do not know that. You only know what was written by him and that was, he slapped his child and
his wife called the police on him because of a lie told to her).
He is not a hero or an inspiration, though many will treat him like a martyr. He is somebody that should be examined. That the mainstream media have not aired this speaks volumes. It, at the very least, shows that he may have been right.
One question that I’ve never seen answered, by any feminist/leftist, is what happens when men actually realize what’s been done to them? Men have a tendency to not take action against gradual restrictions on their rights. They only react once the problems get so severe that they can’t be ignored. However, once that realization is made, they start with political means. But if that doesn’t work, or they don’t have any options in the political arena left, they tend to turn to violent means to restore justice. This is what leads to revolutions. Angry men do not tolerate injustice for very long. If you want an example of this, take a look at the current situation in the middle east.
So my question is this. What happens when men figure out what’s been done to them? When they realize the true scope of the problem? Thomas Ball had the restraint to not go on a rampage against everyone that had a hand in creating his personal hell. What happens when this touches men that don’t have that?
“they tend to turn to violent means to restore justice. This is what leads to revolutions. Angry men do not tolerate injustice for very long.”
Sounds like you’ve found your answer. Kill all the ladies, or at least keep them properly subjugated like the fundie Muslim countries do. Reproduce through cloning, and have lots of sex with your fellow dudes.
That sounds reasonable, right?
No, it doesn’t. It’s a rhetorical question that the people setting policy should consider. I know what’s going to happen. Anybody that has studied any history knows what’s going to happen.
Contrary to what many think, I’d prefer that things not get that bad. I do. NOT. WANT a violent movement going through the streets. But people today seem to believe that it could never happen in this day and age since we’re so very “civilized” which contradicts, literally, thousands of years of history.
It’s stupid and short-sighted.
I mourn what the US has become compared to what the Founding Fathers wanted.
Well, if it’s just a rhetorical question, that explains why you aren’t getting any answers.
That said, of course there’s never a time period in which men aren’t capable of being roused to violence (for good or ill). That’s just denial of human nature. But I do think public policy should be based on what’s right, and not what is feared. The system as it is now isn’t right, or just. Policymakers shouldn’t say, “If we do this, men will kill us” as a rationale for their policies. Instead, they should say, “Rights are being violated, and this can’t be tolerated.”
You appeal to the Founding Fathers to defend this POS? Which one of the Founders advocated males burning themselves to get attention?
This is something monks popularized during the Vietnam War and the left wing jumped on it, embuing them with moral superpowers only because they helped undermine the anti-communist government. Most sane males exchanged “Bhudist Monk” jokes and laughed our butts off at them.
Admiration of this kind of wah wah I’m gonna kill myself approach to a fight is NOT worthy of males. And yeah, I’m tired of males being pulled down and abused and feminized and ‘sensitized’ and turned into ______s and glorifying douchebags like Thomas Ball are a perfect example of this.
I just re-read what you said.
I don’t understand why everyone assumes that if people are against current Feminism, they are automatically a raging misogynist who wants women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, under the overbearing control of all men. It’s a false argument designed to put the speaker on the defensive. It’s poor logic and shows that the person insinuating that has no actual answers to give.
It’s not that I think everyone who opposes current Feminism is like that. (I mean, I oppose abortion and crazy divorce laws as much as anyone, so I’m hardly in line with it myself.) But I just commented to a guy above who said liberals would rather a daughter grow up to be a whore than get a fat lip from her father. In this situation, of course, we’re talking about a 4-year-old. What slutty tendencies did she show, at the advanced age of 4? Why, she licked her father’s hand. What a WHORE. And her WHORE mother probably TRAINED her in WHORING. And the last post I was at regarding this topic, there was more of that in the comments (not so much here, thankfully!).
Anyway, that stuff is creepy, and reminds me of those Muslim dads who murder their daughters (oh, sorry, perform honor killings) because the dirty WHORES had the gall to date/not cover their heads/talk to the wrong dude.
Now, this gentleman never used the word whore, I believe, so it’s possible that he doesn’t share the whore-obsessive sentiments. In that case, I sincerely apologize to him. I think I had that on the brain because I’d just replied to that other guy. Whenever I see a comment about women-as-whores in the context of this topic, it’s always gonna make me think of those crazycakes, murderous fundies.
Ah, forgot… there were a few other comments here as well that put me in mind of such things:
“the more gullible and less intelligent gender (women)”
“just look at palin and bachmann. i’ll bet a large sum that it is their men, their fathers, their husbands, that have shown them the truth”
A woman never could’ve come to an intelligent and fair conclusion from her own thoughts. She is, after all, pf the less intelligent and more gullible gender.
Good grief, it’s seldom I disagree so completely with a Pajamas Media point of view.
What an ultimate act of narcissistic cowardice to burn yourself up in an ‘it’s unfair’ whine. If anything I am embarassed that this jerk shared having Y chromosomes with me. And you want to make him a hero? To demand we pay him more attention?
At least he didn’t hang around running up a bill like some of the suicide chumps out there. Other than that he’s is no role model for men. Which of the founders or the apostles or the saints burned themselves to death? And why not? Good riddance to crispy critters, and please Helen Smith do not presume to defend jackasses like this on behalf of men.
He was about to be sent to prison for 5 years, for the crime of losing his job and falling $3000 behind on child support.
The feminist man haters have been changing the law across the country, making late child support payments a felony (not misdemeanor) that is punished by years in prison (not weeks in jail):
http://rinow.org/legislative-agenda/2011-legislative-agenda-draft-as-of-21411/
Feminism is evil. The worst of all evil. Bottomless evil.
“Can we really stand by and do nothing about the treatment of men and boys in our society much longer?”
Who is the “we” of which you speak? Does that “we” include men?
Men are about 50% of the population, give or take a percentage point. The only thing that need happen is for men to find their voice, their backbone, and their balls.
Men are mistreated precisely because we, as a group, allow ourselves to be.
I also do not for one moment believe that this is a men vs women issue. Whatever women there are who delight in seeing men harmed and abused are rare in addition to being psychotic. That some of them have banded together and stolen the mantle of feminism is a shame, but that does not make them representative of normal women.
I have read many of the responses to this posting. In the whole I found several definite posts who were taking it out of the context of a day being taken though a hell of being separated from his child/children. I have experienced the disproportionate level of response of a “child protective” bureaucracy. I was accused of child neglect by a neighbor for allowing my oldest daughter to take care of my youngest for 2-3 hours a day when they were 16 and 8 years of age. Their mother was not held to account for bruises they acquired under her ‘tender’ care even when statements were made as to how my daughters acquired them. I ask where is the justice…. Today they are closer to me than their mother at ages where custodial orders no longer have meaning. Child protective services are seldom trustworthy as they have political agendas versus justice as their goal.
Has anyone actually read that screed? The guy was a major league nutjob. And a forensic psychologist accepts it all at face value with no question? Are you kidding me?
Would people have been happier if he had been left to torment the family for the past
ten years and the whole thing had ended with him burning his wife and daughters to death before committing suicide by cop?
No, that’s right, that would have been the governments fault too for not properly enforcing a restraining order against such an obviously violent man.
But because his wife called the police out of fear for the safety of her children, they did their job, the courts did their job, and this violent narcissist who had already given up on the marriage and not merely refused but fought every attempt to save the family and his connection with his children was kept from murdering them, that proves the vast liberal conspiracy against men and families.
If someone was really serious about the media blackout they would have started with an effort to get the other side of the story – you know, the wife’s version of the events and all that. And if she didn’t want to give it, maybe there is a reason for that; perhaps she doesn’t want her children to have to read about just what a nutjob their father really was.
Instead all we get is a presentation Ball’s screed, taken as absolute gospel as to the events, and a proclamation of him a martyr to masculinity.
That’s a bigger hitjob on men and families than anything that happened to Ball, even if everything he claimed is absolutely true.
I read Thomas Ball’s suicide note, and if you think he was a “nutjob,” then you couldn’t tell the difference between Jared Loughner and Mickey Mouse.
Nice try, Sigmund.
If you read that manifesto and do not see the similarities with Andrew Stack flying his plane into the building in Austin, Texas and leaving a suicide note blaming the government and calling for violent revolt, then you obviously cannot tell the similarities between Thomas Ball, Andrew Stack, or Jared Loughner, and you can throw in Ted Kaczynski and Timothy McVeigh for good measure.
Just because Ball was too incompetent to murder anyone while taking himself out in no way gives legitimacy to anything he wrote or did. Suggesting it does is a truly sad standard to adopt.
“Has anyone actually read that screed? The guy was a major league nutjob. And a forensic psychologist accepts it all at face value with no question? Are you kidding me?”
Read it, and it made sense to me.
“Just because Ball was too incompetent to murder anyone while taking himself out in no way gives legitimacy to anything he wrote or did. Suggesting it does is a truly sad standard to adopt.”
Really? Really? Are you that brainwashed? He commits what is clearly suicide, and you’re calling him incompetent for not killing anyone else? What, were you disappointed that he didn’t take any innocent lives? Disgusting.
Moreover, the arguments against injustice are legitimate regardless of what Mr. Ball personally did to himself. The situation on the ground remains the same, and the story was suppressed because it would have gotten people thinking and questioning.
Acts like this get people questioning, otherwise not one person would know who Thích Quảng Đức and Mohamed Bouazizi were. Ball knew his sacrifice would bring attention to his issue, and so did the folks who have tried desperately to throw him down the memory hole.
“Read it, and it made sense to me.”
Did it now.
So you would:
Strike a 4 year old child hard enough to cut the inside of her lip.
Be asked by your spouse to leave the house to calm down.
Take such a request so casually that you would do so, driving for at least two hours.
Decide in a few minutes to end your marriage because she called the police.
Refuse any attempt at reconciliation.
Challenge any attempt at intervention designed to reunite you with your children.
Refuse to borrow $3,000 to avoid jail and instead commit suicide.
Call on others to assault police officers.
Well, if all that makes sense to you . . .
“Really? Really? Are you that brainwashed? He commits what is clearly suicide, and you’re calling him incompetent for not killing anyone else? What, were you disappointed that he didn’t take any innocent lives? Disgusting.”
No, it was not clearly suicide.
It was a failed attempt at multiple murder of police officers.
He is quite clear that is his goal, he just expects to fail at it.
“Moreover, the arguments against injustice are legitimate regardless of what Mr. Ball personally did to himself. The situation on the ground remains the same, and the story was suppressed because it would have gotten people thinking and questioning.”
No, the situation on the ground remains completely unknown.
We have his suicidal screed version of the story.
We do not have his wife’s version of the story, or any of the legal and judicial personnel’s version of the story.
“Acts like this get people questioning, otherwise not one person would know who Thích Quảng Đức and Mohamed Bouazizi were. Ball knew his sacrifice would bring attention to his issue, and so did the folks who have tried desperately to throw him down the memory hole.”
Ball hoped his act of narcissim would get him the attention and acclaim in death he felt he deserved but that was denied him in life. I cannot deny that he has achieved that goal.
And it certainly has me questioning why people so quick to condemn Stack and Loughner are so quick to defend Ball. I guess he just went nuts over the “right” government policy for people to back him without actually asking for details first.
I agree completely; Ball’s writing indicates he was a nutjob and his family is better off without him as he seemed so unstable, even before his family court problems began.
How does it feel to have a heart full of hate, Trish?
Here is the bottomless evil of feminism: changing the law so that fathers who fall behind on child support are sent to prison (not jail) for decades (not weeks) on felony charges (not misdemeanour charges):
http://rinow.org/legislative-agenda/2011-legislative-agenda-draft-as-of-21411/
This is who you are, Trish. A person who supports this abhorrent evil. The man loses his job and they want to throw him in prison and throw away the key.
Feminism is hate.
Feminism-
In theory, “the radical idea that women are human beings”.
In practice, the radical idea that men are not.
No family is better off after a suicide. Please think before you write.
People who commit suicide leave wounds and loss that will never heal in the lifetime of each of their family members.
Having seen similar scenarios, absent self-immolation however, I concur with:
QUOTE: “Do men ever matter to these “feminists,” or do they get pleasure out of men’s pain? I am thinking the latter.”
You betcha. It’s right there in the “feminist manifesto”. Perhaps it is also another reason why so many women suffer from Borderline Personality Disorder. All she has to do is call 911, report “abuse” by the male in her life, and all of a sudden HE becomes the criminal even though SHE attacked HIM and he was only trying to subdue her.
OR … How about the HUGE disparity re: child support payments? Men are locked up all over the country as “deadbeat dads” when women RARELY share the same fate for either an inability to pay or a blatant refusal to pay. THAT I have witnessed up close and personal involving both friends and family members.
Women (justifiably) demanded and received “equal rights” decades ago, yet still they expose themselves to such hypocrisy you’d think our society would wake up by now.
You’d think. But equality is NOT what they are all about. Just look at the lower physical standards for women in the military.
To be sure, slapping a 4 year old hard enough to split a lip is a bit over the top, but who writes the rules, Dr. Spock?
~(Ä)~
This message is directly to Dr. Helen. Yes, there are courts which are like crazy pendulums, swinging from favoring one gender over the other. Here in Ohio, we had a fellow named Darrell who was given an office right inside the family court so he could “prove” that women were psychotic liars who poisoned the minds of the children against the fathers. Even when there were obvious times that the fathers were not the victims but sociopaths.
But Dr. Helen, instead of saying that women who choose to be the nest maker and not the bread winners are now evil instead of the philandering men, or the loose woman should get the boot and not the child support, or whatever gender bias is the cause of the current celebrities, we should demand equal treatment and compasionate solutions. The courts encourage demonization because then it makes it easier for the judges to pick a winner and a loser or a side. This is because our laws demand someone be good by making the case that someone is bad.
This Thomas Ball example takes a sick man with an emotional defect and tries to say he was driven to setting himself on fire because of X or Y. Dr. Helen, no sane person does this. Ever. Nelson Mandela was taken from his home for decades. Not every father doesn’t pay his child support because the rules are slanted against him. Many don’t pay because they are jerks. In the same way that we make rules giving cash to women who kick the fathers to the curb, we make rules that create cancerous climates for children to live in. And forgive me for saying this but it is the lawyers who want it this way. It is the law school trained judges who help promote this, just like it is law makers who fail to see the unintended consequences for 1000 page laws. When God said Do not do this, he didn’t say Hey you women, don’t cheat on your husbands, or Hey you husbands, don’t covet your friends goat, he was gender neutral. So should the laws be.
I understand the point is that this isn’t about Thomas Ball, or even fathers plight, but about the media bias, but careful Dr. Helen because the media is that snowball we send down the hill, and that is the reality of life. You might not be sensitive to it, but the “fathers plight” agenda is slowly making in-roads inside the conservative camps and it is every bit as dangerous as the flip side. It is making in-roads by demonizing mothers and women and victizing and hero elevating fathers who can’t/won’t pay support. The question should be, shouldn’t child support be an algorithm? If a PERON has 5 or 10 or 20 children, why shouldn’t he OR SHE be responsible?
One question I never have been able to resolve is how the Supreme Court could say that abortion was legal if the child was inside the mother when 50% of the DNA was exclusively the property of the father, and was put there by mutual consent. The fetus belongs exclusively to the woman to kill or not, until birth, and then the man becomes fiscally responsible for the next 18-26 years? Not good law.
This is not about generalized court unfairness. It is about a systematic war waged by feminist man haters against men and boys. Ball was facing 5 years in PRISON (not jail) for the “crime” of losing his job and falling $3000 behind in child support. This evil feminist campaign continues today, changing back child support from a misdemeanor to a felony:
http://rinow.org/legislative-agenda/2011-legislative-agenda-draft-as-of-21411/
He set himself on fire. That is not a normal mode of suicide by any stretch. The war on men and boys will rage on. Very early on in life Men are stripped of manhood. It is hard to understand why he did it. What is even more messed up is that the media won’t look into it. I do not have facts only , my opinion.
So many heartless people.
Message to bigoted feminist man haters:
Thomas Ball was about to be arrested on FELONY charges of being $3000 late on his child support. He was facing 5 years in prison (not jail). Want to know what kind of mindless hatred led to this? Here is the link to the National Organization for Women’s campaign to make fathers who fall behind on child support guilty of a felony, and imprison them for many years:
http://rinow.org/legislative-agenda/2011-legislative-agenda-draft-as-of-21411/
The feminist war on men and boys is a malignant tumour on this nation. What possible reason is there for sending fathers to prison for decades because they lose their jobs? Thomas Ball paid child support for 9 years, before losing his job in 2009. The family courts denied his petition for readjustment (as they deny 99% of all men’s petitions), because they are overrun with man-hating feminists.
Man hating feminists wanted this man thrown in prison for 5 years, on fathers day, because he lost his job. Feminists are the most evil force upon the planet. There is no limit to their poison, their bigotry, and their meanness.
You’re being awfully casual with some of the facts, here.
By Ball’s own admission, he was uncooperative with the courts and his wife. He’s a nutjob. Normal people do not sue everybody in sight for everything while refusing to cooperate. Perhaps that had something to do with him losing his job in the first place, who knows? He was obviously not a stable person.
It’s a shame that one person in a divorce can make it a living hell for the other person, but that happens. Ball deprived his children of a father because he was mad at the system and his ex-wife. Plenty of men are mad at the system and their exwife, but somehow manage to fulfill their parental responsibilities in spite of the obstacles the system and exwife throws up.
Ball apparently wasn’t capable of this. Turning him into some sort of symbol or martyr for fathers’ rights is not going to convince anyone that fathers ought to have more rights in court. Pick a better poster boy.
When an institution goes south the way our legal system has, of course you have to expect it to hurt the weak worse than the strong. That’s why they take canaries into coal mines.
The weak include the deranged.
The point isn’t whether the fellow was a poster boy for anti-feminism, but with his woes are indicative of institutionalized injustice. Of course a sane man is more capable of bearing injustice. That doesn’t mean he should have to.
You are right. Very sad how our society is being destroyed. I think we are close to the point of heeding the advice of our Forefathers and our documents regarding the necessity of spilling blood to refresh the tree of freedom. They knew nothing about PC, they were highly educated and thinking men who wanted to be free and create a country structured on freedom. They warned us what we must do to keep it free. The rot in our government must be removed. Those working to change the great spirit of our country and our morality regarding God Family and Country, must be weeded out. Children are abused and murdered and the skanks get away with it. Arne Duncan is a self proclaimed homo who Obama hired in our Ed Dept and is planning and organizing the ultimate goal of “educating” our children starting in kindergarten how they can live his role model lifestyle. It is his lifestyle choice but not his choice to touch our children with it in any way shape or form. Start by telling Mr. Obama to remove Mr. Duncan from our government. Then we need to focus on removing Mr. Obama. He clearly hates our country and as he said, he intends to fundamentally change it. We gullible Americans couldn’t have imagined what he really meant. We now realize he meant change our Constitution, which is our fundamental guide. I can imagine the dispair and stress Tommy Ball was experiencing, to do what he did to end his life, and yes, the wimpy journalists in main stream will do no reporting that their bosses do not want. Yes, our journalists are rotten too. TV, print. Certainly white males are being “demoted” in this society as well as children. The clearly low IQ and morally defunct jurors in FL just couldn’t figure what to do with a mom who murdered her 2 yr old daughter and dumped her. The judge didn’t know to prepare her jail time in advance and calculate the time-served and goodie girl time vs the punishment time he decreed, so had to muse about when he could get to that. The guy wants a Judge Judy type show someone said. I hope no one else does what Tommy did. I hope Americans will take it upon themselves to give us the Change we need so that no more Tommys will be so unjustly destroyed by the man-haters.
I am advising my son to marry late, if at all. The deck is stacked against men, and it won’t change in our lifetime. My first marriage was to a woman who was looking for a donor and income source. Once the children reached their early teens, she lost interest and I was screwed.
A friend who went through an even worse divorce was denied visitation by his ex. After spending over $10,000 to enforce his rights as stated in the decree, the (female) judge told him to “work it out” with the ex-wife.
Gentlemen (and some boys),
I guess I was lucky enough not to have my manhood stripped early, or maybe I just refuse to have my manhood stripped. I’ve got a wife and two daughters who are the apples of my eye. I love women. My five favorite people in the world are women, throwing mom and sis into the mix. Never had to mess with a divorce in my entire life.
But men could end this miscarriage of justice today if we wish. We’re the ones allowing ourselves to be pushed around and be the butt of Hollywood jokes. Why? Did these sissy boys and the girls push you around on the playground when you were growing up or something? If so, your daddy did you no favors. Gird your loins.
If there’s enough of you guys that have been screwed by courts, it’s time to team up and go have a “talk” with the justice system. We could use a little “mediation” from the Wild West to straighten things up and run this perversion of justice from the courts (for real).
I hate to point out the obvious, but the only thing keeping our society from complete disarray or your front door from being kicked in and robbed, isn’t the cops or the judicial system. They’re practical useless. It’s us.
Why do men now feel the need to emulate Phil Donahue? Think Clint Eastwood when you’re dealing with these hussies, hags and shrews. Are these feminists tougher than Al-Qaeda? You know what to do….50MM men will stand up cheer when you even the odds. Somebody just has to take the initiative.
Great advice, Tex. Really great. Hope you share your message with lots of ‘net articles. It needs to be said and men need to hear it and hear another man say it’s right to stay strong and masculine and to maintain good relationships with women. Men who have such insight usually do have great respect and relationships with women in their lives. Thanks from a mom.
Cedar Rapids, Iowa, 1984. A man distraught over not seeing his little daughter, when he had legal visitation rights, burned himself.
The Cedar Rapids Gazette refused to cover it, and when called down on it, claimed superior policies, not making public private tragedies or some nonsense like that. Everyone knew if a woman distraught over unpaid child support had burned herself, it would have been front page news in every newspaper in the world for months.
So, do not assume Ball was the first person to do this. The difference is the Internet.
This was the second big mistake by Those Who Hate Men. The first was when Lorena sexually mutilated a man, and millions of women laughed and mocked all men. Men who had never paid attention to the evils of misandry got it. And, this is their second big mistake.
I especially appreciate the folks who called him selfish, etc. Good job. We MRA’s need more help like that. Please carry on.
re: Lorena Bobbitt – I’m pretty sure that most of the jokes I heard made about this were from men.
The overgeneralizing in these posts is mind-boggling. I don’t think I’ve seen this much exhibited misogyny in one place ever before.
For every man-hating feminist, I’ll see you and raise you one woman-hating fathers’-rightist.
> The overgeneralizing in these posts is mind-boggling. I don’t think I’ve seen this much exhibited misogyny in one place ever before.
I dunno. That sounds like an over-generalization to me.
As someone who went through the “feminist” revolution of the 79′s and a former single mom who is now remarried here’s my input:
1 – The feminist mindset has taken over the family court system; I know a number of dads who got treated very poorly, though none as indicated in these stories;
2 – My son’s father paid child support, I never asked for increases, and, while late, he made it.
3 – Disciplining kids is very difficult but they have to learn boundaries – unfortunately, the same people who make court decisions are more than ready to tell you what you can and cannot do with your kids; more kids need boundaries, need to be told “no” and parents need to stick to it.
4 – My guess is Mr. Ball was at his wit’s end – he simply may have snapped.
5 – The press will print anything to make someone a victim as long as it is first a child, second a female and in a very rare instance, a male. And if a male, the press will focus on his “feminine” side. Give me a break.
The biases in our society, by the press mostly, but also by too many “do-gooders” in the “social justice/service/victim industry” are killing this nation.
Men, we need you to band together and stick up for our kids.
Looks like a lot of guys posting on this thread are forgetting that not so long ago guys were able to get away with beating up their wives and children. This kind of abuse could continue over time with no consequences for the abuser. The wife would forgive the guy or be too intimidated to press charges. Now he gets arrested whether the woman wants it or not. The playing field has been leveled and that is a good thing. Now those radical feminists poisoned the atmosphere but a lot of the domestic violence laws were necessary.
I think most people who post here agree with me that the system is now weighted to the disadvantage of men and that it is unjust in many ways. The problem is, when Ms Smith proposed that pathetic excuse for a man as a poster boy for injustice she hadn’t thought it through. Just reading the guy’s whiny, self-serving rant makes me want to kick him. He was just a sicko who provided a sick environment for his kids. No, “I just lost it–you’d know if you had kids!” is not an excuse. I notice that these tough guys who hit children don’t as a matter of course hit the policeman who’s giving them a ticket. Well, maybe some of them do, that’s how out of control they are. And they don’t go around saying, “you gotta be there, sometimes you just have to hit a cop!” They can control themselves when they have to. Ball doesn’t seem the really violent type, more like he’s wallowing in self-pity, but the kind who would lash out and then take a righteous pose. And before it gets to be this man vs. woman thing, women are abusers at least a frequently as men. They may be more subtle about it, but it’s there.
If we’re going to correct the injustices and peel back the heavy hand of the nanny-state men have to be men, not whiny pratts like Ball.
WhiteKnightelf,
You’re so busy swinging your rubber sword (do you figure the women reading this are impressed by the swooshing sound?)that you managed, repeatedly, to miss the entire point of the article.
Did the author, even once, suggest that Mr Ball should be elevated to icon status in the Men’s Rights genre?
Did she say he epitomized manhood? Or the picture of sanity?
The entire point was that the media has totally and, it would seem, purposely buried the story.
Don’t even try to say that they avoid the story because the man was insane- they cover insane, trite nonsense with routine diligence, so that can’t be it.
You’d think that the FACT that Mr Ball advocated DOMESTIC TERRORISM in his letter would have the talking head idiots at least wanting to expose him for that.
You know- the breathless narrative, the wagging head, the grimaced “shame on him, but this is what they’re all like you know” visage for the camera.
I think they’re scared of the pointed questions he asked, the naked truth of it is too much for them to take the chance- they, after all, have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
Mr Ball may have erred gravely in handling his child the way he did (the court, by the way, found him “not guilty” of child abuse) but even a bonafide lunatic can have insights- perhaps exceptional insights – in that they’ll go places sane people will not.
Indeed, Mr Ball will never be the poster boy for Men’s Rights. The media’s suppression of the story will, however, be remembered as a milestone in cultural misandry.
I wonder, WhiteKnightelf:
Did you hear about the young Florida boy (11 years old, I recall) who was stripped naked by three teenaged girls who recorded their deed and posted it on You Tube?
Had the roles in that crime been reversed, only an American living under a rock wouldn’t have heard about it in breathless detail. The call for mandatory rape prevention training for boys over thirteen would have saturated the land by now.
But?
Nothing.
I guess that young fellow was a poor excuse for a “man” too- media bias had nothing to do with it.
Before you begin your chivalrous chest thumping and crotch pulling over who the real men are, remember- types such as yourself ENABLED the misandry to advance to the blatant degree we witness now. Your pedestalization of women- inherent in your stupid chivalry- has given their bad behaviour a free pass, and it will continue to do so.
You bear as much shame as Thomas Ball.
Ever since I was a wee elfling people have been making fun of my name. I’ts very hurtful. I wasn’t discussing the media’s response to the guy’s bizarre immolation though it is something to be considered. My take is that in small towns the local papers don’t like to publicize stuff that hurts the town’s image. MSM on the other hand is dominated by liberal ideology and does’t print stories that go against it. But we knew that.
WhiteKnightelf wrote:
“I wasn’t discussing the media’s response to the guy’s bizarre immolation though it is something to be considered.”
There’s your trouble. The author of the article WAS discussing the media suppression of this event; she was NOT advocating for Mr Ball being elevated to iconic martyr status, though you and several others have attempted to steer the discussion in that direction- a (deliberate?) misrepresentation.
> The playing field has been leveled and that is a good thing. Now those radical feminists poisoned the atmosphere but a lot of the domestic violence laws were necessary.
The point being argued by many in these comments is that the playing field has not been leveled, but tilted in the other direction. That is, the point of feminism has not been to get equal, but to get even.
“Just reading the guy’s whiny, self-serving rant makes me want to kick him.”
I know what you mean – just reading your comment makes me want to kick you.
All this business of getting “screwed by the courts” really isn’t true.
The truth of the matter is, all a divorcing couple has to do is go before a judge and say essentially:
1) we want a divorce;
2) we have agreed on how to split up our property; and
3) we have agreed on how we will take care of our responsibilities to our kids.
Items 2) and 3) have to be supported by written statements showing that this was actually done.
With those item in hand, the judge in a no-fault state has NO OPTION but to grant a divorce.
Some divorces actually happen just like that. Some people go to mediators in order to obtain that result.
And then, there are the people who do not want to just end their marriages, but to do real harm to their spouses and children before they go. Those are the men and women who cheat, who lie, who get themselves an vicious affair partner for the purpose of picking fights with the soon-to-be-ex spouse. There are the ones who suddenly decide that the family money now belongs to them alone, who have “sudden” “business reverses” so that their kids have no money for college, but the affair partner gets to travel for the vacations the family could never afford, because they were saving for college and retirement.
Ugly situations get dumped in the laps of judges all the time, and they resort to the usual method of deciding things: they say “show me.” And both sides invariably come off looking awful.
One simple, hard fact is that most families rely on the entire family income to meet their goals for themselves and their children. When one spouse decides to break up the family, then the extra expense of a second residence can be crushing. The courts are charged to protect the interest of the children, and that means that whoever keeps the children will get the larger part of the family income for a while. Some people think that’s not fair. But some people stopped caring about their spouse and children a long time ago, and all they are doing in court is trying to rob the people they used to love. Either spouse can cause the problem, and by the time the end has come, both spouses can be the problem.
Neither the law nor the courts require a divorce to be ugly. The quality of the divorce is determined by the divorcing couple, and nobody else.
One major problem with this is that the courts have an overwhelming bias for females. This creates an incentive for wives to divorce their husbands, and to make false allegations – which the courts will accept as fact without proof. The majority of divorces are initiated by wives, and they receive custody/child support in MOST cases. It’s become an industry where women and the state conspire to enslave men.
Why should the man have to pay if the woman wants out?
Valerie, just like her toady Beth Donovan, is a rabid man-hater who thinks men exist only to serve her needs.
Valerie needs to read The Misandry Bubble to learn about how to redeem herself from the injustice she is propagating, as a rabid feminist.
“With those item in hand, the judge in a no-fault state has NO OPTION but to grant a divorce.”
Seriously? Yes that’s true, but it ought to be obvious that it depends on both people being willing to be reasonable. If only one of them isn’t, they can make the other one’s life miserable. Plenty of them (mostly women, some men) choose to do so because they’re angry. The system is stupid because it refuses to recognize this and put safeguards in place to prevent the law being used as a weapon by bitter exes.
Thomas Ball wasn’t perfect, but he deserved to be made to take an anger management course, not be put out of his home and have his family destroyed forever because one disturbed social worker chose to buffalo his wife into making a criminal complaint. If you don’t get that, turn in your human card.
You don’t know that.
What don’t I know? Game theory? Two individuals can both be better off by cooperating, but each also has incentive to try to take it all (though if they unfortunately lose, they get nothing and the other person takes the pot)
The court system magnifies the incentives to fight instead of working out your differences, especially for the person who has a lower economic status. You don’t have to agree with Tom Ball to realize that. But you do have to have been personally involved in a family court issue, which you clearly haven’t. I’m glad for you and hope your luck holds out, but you’re ignorant of the things that can happen once you start – or are pushed – down that road.
You don’t know what happened in that family. For example you don’t know if a ‘disturbed social worker’ ‘buffaloed his wife’ into making charges or if the wife had good reason to fear the husband and his influence on the children. I don’t know either, but I can surmise from his disjointed, poorly written, self-pitying essay that he’s a narcissist who only really cares for himself. And what financial motive would the wife have to pursue the case, the guy was a poor auto mechanic not a rich guy?
WhiteKnightelf wrote:
“You don’t know what happened in that family. For example you don’t know if a ‘disturbed social worker’ ‘buffaloed his wife’ into making charges”
We know that that was what Mr Ball claimed. We can easily infer that the systematic injustice of it all was what drove him to a desperate act- not narcissism.
I, for one, know that certain friends of mine have been treated EXACTLY this way.
They are not narcissists.
They are not child abusers.
They are not wife beaters.
They are victims of a system that, invigorated and empowered by the legislative spiderweb known as “VAWA”, has circumvented Constitutional guarantee of “equal protection under the law”. Mr Ball aptly described this when he wrote of the “Second Book of Laws”.
Enough of what he wrote concerning his own personal situation rings true when compared with situations of people I know and trust.
nightelf earned his money on this thread.
Thomas Ball’s screed opened my eyes as a
25 year old white male. I’ll be getting a 1 ton
prenuptial if and when I ever get married.
I’ll only be getting married if I can afford
the lawyers for a possible divorce.
Helen,
Thank you for your consistent and persistent efforts to highlight these issues!
Thomas Ball made a political statement to highlight the travesty of justice of the “family” court system and the demonization of and discrimination against men and boys that has been going on for decades.
The media ignored it, because it doesn’t want us to notice.
To me, the most frightening thing about the responses to this incident are the number of people who aren’t asking the obvious question, particularly among the self-professed small government conservatives.
Why is the government involved in the private business of marriage?
What part of The Constitution gives the government the authority to regulate and license the institution of marriage…and to punish American citizens for violations of those un-Constitutional regulations?
Remember, in the document, any power not explicitly granted to the federal government reverts to the states, and any power not ascribed to the states reverts to the people. Marriage belongs to the people, not to the state or the feds.
I cringe at many tv commercials, first they provide no information regarding the product, just hype and anti-male entertainment. As a woman it is humiliating to me to see how blatent the corporations are in destroying masculinity in males and promoting it in fe-males. I simply do not buy their products and have called one or two to complain, knowing they will ignore comments contrary to their agendas. A yogurt commercial whose product I purchased for my family is no longer in my fridge. The commercial shows a harsh fe-male jibbering nonsense on the phone while the male overhears her comments about the yogurt varieties in her fridge, causing the male to sneak and peek in the fridge. The harsh fe-male interrupts her call to snap at the male asking what he is doing looking in the fridge. He cowers and quits. Any male that allows that product in his house has lost his masculinity. So many commercials like that. A fe-male insurance agent busts a sharp looking young man in motorcycle jacket looking through shelf of insurance products. She is friendly then deflates him telling him her motorcycle is bigger than his (yes, that is the intent) and he too folds and slips away. A breakfast cereal product features a harsh fe-male who does the talking and her husband who trys to speak but clearly needs her permission. Fellas can’t you do something about this? Call the corp offices tell them off, boycott the product and change channels when they are on. These things are not accidents, they truly are out to destroy masculinity, the rights of men and boys to their identities proudly. Challenge the fe-male in group conversations who makes snide remarks like “boys will be boys” etc. Confront her. She is cutting you down. Change those attitudes by demanding an apology and if refused, take whoever is with you and leave. Let her fluster and she will have learned a lesson. Women are under attack too, being made look like prostitutes in commercials and girls are being humiliated by the skanks belting out dumb songs and music dressed like prostitutes. Our society is being destroyed. Time to fight… time to take a stand and fight a lot of evil.
Hiya very cool blog!! Guy .. Beautiful .. Amazing .. I’ll bookmark your web site and take the feeds additionally?I am satisfied to find a lot of useful information here within the submit, we need develop more strategies on this regard, thank you for sharing. . . . . .