|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
OneWayTraffic
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
|
 Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 4:49 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
My sister has a child. The father of the child is an absolute parasite. She has to tolerate him, because she has a child with him. He gambles, drinks, and gets himself into enormous debt. He deliberately got her pregnant (has boasted about it to her since) so that he could keep her (he knew she was going to break up with him). He uses the son so that he can keep his claws in my sister and sponge off her. My sister has tried to seperate from him several times. Unfortunately, she was the responsible person who had a job and bought a house. He keeps coming back to live at her house. Because of their son, she feels unable to throw his ass out on the street. Now they live together, although they are seperated.
If she could be rid of him, maybe she could have a decent man and buy a bigger house, and go on holidays and live a peaceful life. But parasite either lives at her house, or demands she pays his rent when he lives elsewhere. She's at the end of her tether. Even though he could never hold down a job, he never helped her with the kid. She has a full demanding good salaried job, yet has to carry the burden of the child mostly alone, or with the help of me and my mother. Not only that, she carried the full economic burden of housing and feeding them all. She is absolutely exhausted. She never has a moments rest. Either she is working, caring for her son, or travelling to and fro from work. She doesn't know what she can do. I am very worried about her. She is burning out.
It's not just men who get a raw deal in this life you know. |
Disclaimer: There may be two sides here of course but I'm going to take this at face value for simplicity.
I'm sure that you see the fallacy here, even if she does not. What kind of role model is the guy going to be for her son? If possible she should throw him out for the sake of her son, if not for herself. Otherwise if she continues what she's doing one of two things will happen. Her son will end up hating his own father, or he will grow up to be just like him. Or both at the same time.
If she can collect evidence that he's never done anything I'm sure he'll get short shrift in front of a family court. Try some testimonials from previous employers or ex-friends or even his parents. Sometimes the Grandparents will chose the welfare of their grandchildren over a wayward child.
Who knows, maybe if she stops enabling his current behaviour he'll even turn his life around. It's happened before, but only when things hit rock bottom. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
OneWayTraffic
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 4:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
In Canada, the women is awarded sole custody 90% of the time. What men should take from this is never under any circumstances have a kid or marry a woman in Canada. The game is rigged against you.
All the whining about how much the woman sacrifices or sad narratives about degenerate drunk dads is totally irrelevant to structured and legal sexism against men in the "family" law system in Canada. A fair system would seek to provide fairness unless there is a degenerate on either side, or abuse, or etc. |
True, but remember that things have been biased against women for a lot longer than the last 50 years. Doesn't make it right.
A family friend of my Dad's was having a daughter getting divorced. She was going to get sole custody and lock him out by basically accusing him of all sorts of things. She told her parents (deeply Catholic) to stay out of it or they'd see their Grandchildren just once or twice a year.
They thought about it and then decided that right was right and their son in law wasn't at all like she was making out. They said as much to the judge.
Upshot was he moved back to their town with his kids and they got to see the grandkids every day.
I'm not sure how long it took them to reconcile with their daughter (if they have.) I heard this all from my Dad.
Sometimes there is a happy ending.
This was in NZ. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 5:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| some waygug-in wrote: |
How fair is that? |
Without seeing the judge's ruling, I can't say. Did she give up med school half way through to marry him and help his career? |
So what if she had? It would be her decision to give up med school, wouldn't it? Not some court mandated garbage... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 7:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| OneWayTraffic wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
In Canada, the women is awarded sole custody 90% of the time. What men should take from this is never under any circumstances have a kid or marry a woman in Canada. The game is rigged against you.
All the whining about how much the woman sacrifices or sad narratives about degenerate drunk dads is totally irrelevant to structured and legal sexism against men in the "family" law system in Canada. A fair system would seek to provide fairness unless there is a degenerate on either side, or abuse, or etc. |
True, but remember that things have been biased against women for a lot longer than the last 50 years. Doesn't make it right. |
Then why mention it?
This is exactly how deeply sexist institutions like this are maintained. Whenever bias against men in family law is mentioned, we fall into a "well, women were oppressed too" moapy platitude that is entirely irrelevant to the goal of building a just society now. A sexist institution yesterday does not justify the building of sexist but opposite institution today.
If it isn't relevant, don't mention it. There aren't any kinda-cute 20 year old feminist girlies on this site that might blow you for making the right noise about gender discrimination. We can move on. And never allow somebody else to hijack the discussion with victim theater. Two wrongs do not make a right, and anyways public policy is not an appropriate venue for feminist amends making. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| OneWayTraffic wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
My sister has a child. The father of the child is an absolute parasite. She has to tolerate him, because she has a child with him. He gambles, drinks, and gets himself into enormous debt. He deliberately got her pregnant (has boasted about it to her since) so that he could keep her (he knew she was going to break up with him). He uses the son so that he can keep his claws in my sister and sponge off her. My sister has tried to seperate from him several times. Unfortunately, she was the responsible person who had a job and bought a house. He keeps coming back to live at her house. Because of their son, she feels unable to throw his ass out on the street. Now they live together, although they are seperated.
If she could be rid of him, maybe she could have a decent man and buy a bigger house, and go on holidays and live a peaceful life. But parasite either lives at her house, or demands she pays his rent when he lives elsewhere. She's at the end of her tether. Even though he could never hold down a job, he never helped her with the kid. She has a full demanding good salaried job, yet has to carry the burden of the child mostly alone, or with the help of me and my mother. Not only that, she carried the full economic burden of housing and feeding them all. She is absolutely exhausted. She never has a moments rest. Either she is working, caring for her son, or travelling to and fro from work. She doesn't know what she can do. I am very worried about her. She is burning out.
It's not just men who get a raw deal in this life you know. |
Disclaimer: There may be two sides here of course but I'm going to take this at face value for simplicity.
I'm sure that you see the fallacy here, even if she does not. What kind of role model is the guy going to be for her son? If possible she should throw him out for the sake of her son, if not for herself. Otherwise if she continues what she's doing one of two things will happen. Her son will end up hating his own father, or he will grow up to be just like him. Or both at the same time.
If she can collect evidence that he's never done anything I'm sure he'll get short shrift in front of a family court. Try some testimonials from previous employers or ex-friends or even his parents. Sometimes the Grandparents will chose the welfare of their grandchildren over a wayward child.
Who knows, maybe if she stops enabling his current behaviour he'll even turn his life around. It's happened before, but only when things hit rock bottom. |
She's trying to get rid of him at the moment. He had moved out, but then could never pay his rent, and he'd beg her to bail him out, which she did because it was her son's father, and it was crippling her financially. So him being in the house is actually less of a burden for now. He's claiming he's going to work overseas for a bit. She's hoping this is true.
There was a time, though she couldn't stand him, she thought her kid needed him, so she put up with it. Her world revolves around her little boy and she tries to do everything she can for him. She has lately come to the kind of conclusion you've made - that he is a negative role model for her boy, and having him around is not necessarily in her boy's best interests.
There's only one grandparent left, and she is on her last legs. I doubt she'd go against her son. But his family do know he is a problem. His sister was so embarrassed by his general uselessness, that she gave a lot of help to my sister to try and compensate. but now she's looking after the mother, and can no longer help. It seems in their family it is always the woman who carries the burden. Perhaps that was part of the problem. Also he was the last child, had much later than his siblings, and was pretty much overlooked by his mum and neglected by his aged father. Probably also part of the problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fishead soup
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One word solution
WELFARE
Get paid by the government to sit home watch TV and drink beer.
Translated for Big Bird
DOLE |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
These bureaucrats are tier 1 flunkies who use the tools of the state to push their sexist revenge fantasy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 8:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I find it particularly appalling that people have little or no recourse in cases such as this.
These gov't jerks can claim anything they want, no need of proof or verification and just go into your bank account and take it.
Sounds a lot like the Canadian government practices.
I guess things aren't all that different in the US after all.
By the way, at the end of the news clip. They said his ex-wife didn't receive any of the money they took from him....so what is going on here? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Real Reality
Joined: 10 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mommy's little secret
By CAROLYN ABRAHAM, Globe and Mail (December 14, 2002)
from the Canadian Children's Rights Council
http://www.canadiancrc.com/Newspaper_Articles/Globe_and_Mail_Moms_Little_secret_14DEC02.aspx
| Quote: |
It's now widely accepted among those who work in genetics that roughly 10 per cent of us are not fathered by the man we believe to be dad....
In the early 1970s, a schoolteacher in southern England assigned a class science project in which his students were to find out the blood types of their parents. The students were then to use this information to deduce their own blood types (because a gene from each parent determines your blood type, in most instances only a certain number of combinations are possible). Instead, 30 per cent of the students discovered their dads were not their biologically fathers....
"Reproductive deception is morally similar to rape," Dr. Lipton said. "If you trick someone into raising a baby not his own, and he puts 20 years of his life into an endeavour based on a falsehood, that is appalling.
"If I were the queen of the world, birth control, of any form, would be available to any woman who wants it and DNA testing would be available for all the men so that they would know who their babies are."
There are certainly those -- the "Duped Dads" among them -- who would agree with her.
Morgan Wise remembers how in 1999 the doctor rose from his chair, walked around the desk and sat down in front of him. Mr. Wise's youngest son had been diagnosed with cystic fibrosis years earlier, but a medical test showed Mr. Wise did not carry a CF gene.
"My first thought was that they must have misdiagnosed my son," the 40-year-old railway engineer from Big Spring, Tex., said in an interview this week.
But then the doctor looked him squarely in the eye and said: "Morgan, do you have any reason to think this boy might not be yours?"
The possibility seemed outlandish. He had been married to the same woman for 13 years and they had had three boys and a girl before they broke up in 1996. But for peace of mind, he decided to go ahead with paternity tests. In March, 1999, the results arrived by mail -- a creased piece of paper telling him that not one of the three boys was his.
"I felt anger toward [my first wife] and sadness, and I felt so sorry for my kids," Mr. Wise recalled. "I told my boys, 'I love you all, you'll always be my sons, the only difference is now I'm not your birth father.' "
Despite this revelation, a district court judge ruled that Mr. Wise had to continue paying child support for the three boys. Based on a 500-year-old common law, most states operate on the presumption that a husband is the father of any child born to his wife during a marriage.
Mr. Wise took his case to the media, hoping to generate political support and contact other men in a similar situation. Instead, he angered the judge, who revoked his visitation rights to the children but left him responsible for $1,100 (U.S.) in monthly support.
"This," Mr. Wise warned, "could happen to anyone.".... |
Moms Can Be Deadbeats Too
By Liza Porteus
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,59963,00.html
| Quote: |
| The percentage of "deadbeat" moms is actually higher than that of dads who won't pay, even though mothers are more consistently awarded custody of children by the courts. |
Successful women begrudge husbands who earn less, study claims
by BETH HALE, The Daily Mail (November 29, 2006)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=419488&in_page_id=1879
Lonely at the top
By Cheryl Wetzstein, THE WASHINGTON TIMES (December 13, 2005)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/culture/20051212-103116-1924r.htm
| Quote: |
Does success make women less marriageable to men? In some cases, the answer is yes: Most women like to 'marry up,' and that is harder to do if a woman is on the top floor of her profession....
The NFI study, written by University of Texas at Austin professor Norval Glenn, found that marrying between the ages of 23 and 27 might be optimal for couples. Mr. Glenn deduced this by asking married couples of various ages whether they were "very happy." Those who married between 23 and 27 were significantly more likely to answer yes. The group least likely to say their marriages were "very happy" were those who waited until age 28 or older to marry, the NFI study found.... |
Women doctors 'less productive than males'
By Nic Fleming, Medical Correspondent, Telegraph (January 28, 2008)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/25/nhs225.xml
Working long hours worse for women than men
Yahoo! News (July 12, 2006)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060712/hl_nm/stress_dc
Reuters
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=healthNews&storyID=2006-07-12T165601Z_01_L12782205_RTRUKOC_0_US-STRESS.xml
Women aspire to be housewives without any of the housework
By Sarah Womack, Telegraph (November 5, 2004)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/05/11/nwife11.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/05/11/ixhome.html
| Quote: |
| "In reality they are domestic divas who want the flawless kids, courtesy of the nanny; a spotless home, thanks to a cleaning service; and a reputation for being a fabulously put-together homemaker. These are the women who are becoming a target of disdain and rage on the part of spouses who didn't expect to be shouldering the financial burden single-handedly." |
Housework 'kept women fit'
BBC News (August 5, 2003)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3125181.stm
Girls overtake boys as binge drinkers: study
Yahoo!News (June 1, 2006)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060601/hl_nm/binge_drinkers_dc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cheonmunka
Joined: 04 Jun 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| In Canada, the women is awarded sole custody 90% of the time. |
This is not at all surprising considering childbirth itself. It's only natural, really.
| Quote: |
| I think you will find that women from other cultures still value more traditional family values. Seek them out (and some will be Anglo, though unfortunately very religious) and you likely won't have the extent of problems. |
You are quite right. A strong reliable woman at the helm will keep the family together.
But the male still has to do his part. And, it ain't no small part. He should do housework everyday. He should not call in sick for work from hangovers. He should be out the door off to work everyday. He should not go out with friends any more than once a month at most.
He should include his wife in his plans and entertainment. His entertainment should consist of her, her family, his family, and the kids.
PS: I go out by myself to meet people as friends about once every three or four months. And am home before midnight.
| Quote: |
| Trust me, my stay at home wife isn't at all a parasite. She's on call 24/7. I at least get my freetime. |
True, true, true.
I mostly slept through the night in the early childhood times. Wifey (bless 'er lovlee soul) couldn't. (Not with her delicious nipples.) Even now the children are school kids she is out there in the am checking their blankets. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
But the male still has to do his part. And, it ain't no small part. He should do housework everyday. He should not call in sick for work from hangovers. He should be out the door off to work everyday. He should not go out with friends any more than once a month at most.
He should include his wife in his plans and entertainment. His entertainment should consist of her, her family, his family, and the kids.
|
I agree entirely. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 1:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
BB,
I have always tended to look at social issues from a liberal/left perspective, but it is a fact that the family court and child custody after divorce system is especially bad and biased against men and fathers in Canada. The system in the US is superior, and although I'm not familiar with the systems in the UK or Australia, I have no doubt that their systems are more equitable. Because of this, I believe Canadian respondents (male) to this thread may come across as...seemingly inappropriately bitter or more hostile. It's partly a problem of comparing apples and oranges.
A great many men my age in Canada have discounted the possibility of marriage and children, simply because the system is so biased against men in case of divorce. Even textbooks published in Canada that I have seen, for teaching English in asia, assume and present the idea that marriage is a smooth transition from courtship to marriage to divorce to eventual sole custody of the children by the female; these are described as the NORM.
The contributions of women around the house are lauded by so-called economists, while the household contributions of men are completely discounted. A number of recent Canadian widows whose husbands have been killed in Afghanistan have been 'rediscovering' all the things that their husbands contributed, sadly, now that they are gone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ReeseDog wrote: |
Here's one for you:
My ex had custody of our daughter for nine years, during which time I paid child support faithfully. She gave me custody one year ago. She paid child support for the first two months and then stopped. She's in the wind, now. She doesn't call or anything. All I hear about these days is so-called "deadbeat dads." What about deadbeat moms out there? Or do they get a pass because they're female? |
A friend of a friend just got dumped after five years after he adopted his wife's FIVE children.
Seems his estranged wife's ex was in prison all that time, and they got back together immediately upon his release.
As it stands now, he is responsible for child support for all those kids- - and possibly alimony. Five years is the cut off point in that state for alimony. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RJjr
Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Location: Turning on a Lamp
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would live in an ingloo at the North Pole or hide in a cave in Waziristan before I would ever give one penny to an ex-wife. I would like to marry my favorite girlfriend in Vietnam, but I've seen so many of my former truck drivers get financially raped by their ex-wives over the years and had so many girlfriends over the years who were financially raping their ex-husbands that I feel like it would be naive of me to think it wouldn't happen to me, even though I wish I could marry that girl and bring her to America. I've just seen it happen too many times before.
The idea that non-Western women are more trustworthy than Western women is probably an inaccurate stereotype, at least from my own experiences. When I was living in Nashville, USA, I was dating a 35 year old Korean lady who had two young daughters. She was going through a divorce with her ex-military American husband. Her best friend was a Korean lady of roughly the same age with an infant daugher and American ex-husband (also ex-military).
Those two guys had supported their K-wives the whole time they had been married. The wives never worked a day. After the divorces, their wives were living off alimony and food stamps. Both women eventually gave up their daughters to their ex-husbands even though their ex-husbands were working their asses off while their ex-wives were living the life of sex, alcohol, and karaoke.
My girlfriend always talked about how generous her ex-husband was, but his generosity was being wasted on her spending his money on gas and beer to come to my apartment to phuck (not that I'm complaining) and to go get drunk with her friend at karaoke bars.
I had a wild Turkish girlfriend when I lived in North Carolina and there was some weird shit going on with her divorce/parental life, but to her credit she did work hard and hold down a good job.
I especially think it's bad that the government rules against our soldiers in the alimony cases when our soldiers are stationed overseas so much and are at a higher risk of marrying a green card girl and financial predators in general. If we're going to demand that our troops stay overseas so much, there should be a special court that handles their divorce cases and protects them. The soldiers protect us from harm. We should return the favor and protect them when we can. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
