Gynocentrism

Is It Opposite Day? Obama Implementing Positive Child Support Reform?

child support
Comments (19)
  1. tim.oppenheimer says:

    7 years of mostly lip service for the black community. Although this will not be explicitly racial, this will be great for poor men, especially in the ghettos.

    I’ve been rewatching The Wire, and it gives some context to some of your early work, Bar Bar. What a show.

    Thanks for this essay. Here’s hoping Obama can successfully help men for once.

  2. JayDoubleGee says:

    The only thing I can say here is this. The number one thing that should change in America (like in most western nations) is the fact that taxpayers should have the undeniable right to decide what to do with their taxes. I believe it is absolutely disgusting the fact that american taxpayers are literally forced to spend their money to support such an absurd system which keeps sending innocent men to jail for the most ridiculous things, which aren’t even considered offences in other countries.

    I can’t even believe that an 18 year old young African American man, who doesn’t have a job (and can’t find one) does not have the right to sell marijuana, which is not an offence in other nations, he isn’t helped in the slightest way, and once in jail, he is forced to pay child support, even if he cannot actually have a job because he’s in prison. I mean, the whole thing is out of the weirdest episode of the twilight zone. Do these people even think, or, like I’m very tempted to believe, are they just desperately trying to find any excuse to send innocent men to jail, generating (and this is the real monstrosity), a multi billion dollar industry, financed by taxpayers who, like I mentioned before, do not have the right to oppose or even decide what to do with and how to spend their money?

    Barack Obama is a feminist moron I have no sympathy for that clown whatever his sudden change of beliefs or opinion. I still don’t trust him and I consider every single action of that bafoon in the most suspicious way. Couldn’t care less if he now appears to help men (right after 7 years of hyper feminist horseshit). If you spend 7 years out of 8 as a president behaving like a mangina white knight gynocentric asshole, there is no way I’m going to look at your last year as the president, thinking “oh but now he’s finally doing something”. Too little too late.

    There is a real need for a small, decentralised government that allows direct democratic choices, and gives more power to local communities and citizens, and most importantly, allows taxpayers to have a say on how to spend and how much money is used and given to the State. Frankly I strongly believe that if taxpayers had the right to choose what to do with their tax dollars, there is no way in the universe they would give hundreds of billions of dollars to the army, to Israel or to the unsuccessful and unproductive U.S. prison system. Can you imagine what would happen in America, if americans had the right to decide what to do and how to spend their own money? Everything would be different. And chances are that, in the end, there would be less misandry and gynocentrism because both phenomena are produced by a toxic and highly parasitic system, fuelled by heavy and forcible, anti democratic taxation.

    On child support I have very little to say. And my opinion hasn’t changed at all in the last 10 years. The parent who raises the child should pay for that child. End of story. This is my rule. Very simple, very logical, very direct and extremely fair.

    You want the baby? You pay.
    You don’t want your ex boyfriend or ex husband to have the baby? You pay.
    The father is considered unfit to raise the child? Then he’s also unfit to pay. You don’t want to have anything to do with your ex man / ex husband? Then you shouldn’t have a single dollar out of his pocket. The father is not allowed to live / sleep with his kids? Then he’s not forced to pay for them. How complicated is that? Which part of it is too complicated to understand? No child = no money. Yes money = yes child.

    1. Tamerlame says:

      Fathers should certainly not pay when they do not have rights to see their kids.

  3. M.G. How says:

    Not sure about the US, but Canada keeps track of child support payments at the national level.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/deadbeats-across-canada-owe-more-than-3-7b-in-support-1.2782955

    In short, 66% of all child support payments are not fulfilled in Canada.
    But, if you look at the higher population of Ontario, it’s closer to 80%.

    What this translates to is the national and provincial debt being artificially increased with no way of being erased. None of the ‘deadbeat’ dad’s are going to go to court to be forgiven for the missed support payments. They know they’ll either have assets taken, earnings garnished, or be incarcerated.

    Thus the debt lingers. But, this debt is more sinister, because it’s correlated with population density. So productive cities get stuck with the debt. (i.e. the majority of Ontario’s 2 billion debt from family arrears is smack dab on the greater toronto and waterloo areas.)
    This means the cities themselves have to pay the debt off rather than being pardoned or helped by the province or by the nation. (A consequence of family law differing and having a different collection agency in every county/political-division)

    I don’t see this shift by Obama as equitable towards men. Obama’s administration is trying to stop noncollectable debts from becoming problematic due to only being payable at the city level. But, he’s doing this now, at the end of his term, where he has nothing to lose. Seems like he’s just playing the politics game.

    I would be interest in knowing what the US figures are. I suspect it’s closer to 95% unpaid for it to prompt a response to the problem.

  4. DudeWheresmyVideo? says:

    Bar – I am going to channel the same frustration of one of Stardusk’s fans he mentioned in one of the old hangout sessions with you. There is so much happening in the world – it’s time we got an update from you on your perspective, I KNOW you are NOT entertaining us with videos and I understand you are writing the book but your YT channel hasn’t been updated for a month it seems.

    Please do a hangout session with Niko and the gang discussing random shit and current affairs, it is fun to listen to when having a few beers – the Thanksgiving and Xmas season sucks, very little new MGTOW content comes up during this time.

    Feel free to unload on me with venom everyone else – sorry for being an entitled ass, waiting impatiently for the book as well!

    1. Barbar says:

      Lol I’ll see what I can do maybe I’ll get a video up over the thanksgiving break

      1. tamerlame says:

        I think you should the odd video to help your channel carry on growing. Your ideas need even more promotion.

  5. tamerlame says:

    The idea that men should not play a penny/cent of child support, is an idea that should be promoted. I think the child support racket gives women proxy violence power over men.

    Men have no right to their families why should they pay a thing?

    Also women in the UK can just give their kids up and drop them in care on a whim.

  6. tamerlame says:

    Bar Bar Do you get money if people click the adds on your blog?

  7. NotWorth TheSqueeze says:

    I will say this much, this age of empowered women can be a boon for mgtow men who want to have children and not pay too much child support. At least in the state of Florida, if you knock up a chick who makes more than you do, and she gets custody, then your child support might not be too bad.

    eg. from FL online calculator
    you make 2500 she makes 3500, then 2 kids cost about $700

    if you have them for a 1/3 of overnight stays, then it drops to $230

    So if you are mgtow, live in Florida, has a decent job, want kids and don’t mind paying a little child support, then just knock up some career chick who is in her mid-30s and desperate for kid.

    1. Tamerlame says:

      If you want a kid, you are not a MGTOW man full stop.

      1. NotWorth TheSqueeze says:

        Only by your definition.

        1. dudeschmock says:

          What would your definition be then? Unless you are abandoning your children, you are not alone, hence can’t go your own way. Just like Married Men cannot go their own way – they are tied to the wife via the state.

          1. NotWorth TheSqueeze says:

            You don’t have to be alone to be mgtow. Heck, bar bar just did an article about Rinaldo who is sort living a mgtow life with his kid.

          2. dudeschmock says:

            Rinaldo has the money to do that. If you work a normal 40 hour week, maybe even on call for the weekends, who is watching your Kid?

  8. NotWorthe TheSqueeze says:

    Forgot to mention thay those figured are per month. Plus it’s a win/win for both parties. You get kids and your freedom, she gets kids and eventually cats.

  9. Kong says:

    It’s hardly a good deed on Obamas part, I doubt he implemented this out of an attempt to be more fair. Obama is by far one of the most manipulative politicians on the face of this earth, he knows exactly how to pander to women to ensure they vote for him but women are just too stupid to realise it.

    Regardless of any action by Obama, I would never vote for the man. His dishonesty and the damage he has done to men and boys has been calculated and deliberate.

  10. NotWorth TheSqueeze says:

    @dudeschmock
    now you are moving the goal post. initially you were claiming one has to be alone to be mgtow, now you are discussing finances.

    @barbar
    this commenting system sucks gorilla balls.

    1. dudeschmock says:

      Agreed on the Commenting System. It does suck.

      Men Going Their Own Way – Isn’t it kind of obvious? It has it right in its Name. Not Married Men Going Their Own Way, of Fathers Going Their Own Way – just MEN.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *