Thursday, June 28, 2007

A blatantly unfair child-support case

Child support is of course a euphemism for mommy support.

But here we have a woman who is actually fair, who is actually doing her bit to earn the 50% thing the female supremacists like to talk about oh-so-often. She has the kids half the time, while the Dad has the kids half the time. But of course Daddy is the walking wallet, and is ordered to pay GBP 365 a month to the wife. She is fair, but we see the corruption and the malfeasance of the system shine through... he has been jailed.

Think about that for a minute. She agrees that he shouldn't pay child support, she implores the judge not to send him in because it'll negatively affect the family, but the man still goes to jail.

He's off to gaol for 42 days. That's a month and a half. Any bets on the type of treatment he'll get in jail? Any doubts that his F4J connections did him in?

The problem is with the system. People nowadays think that the system can do no wrong, that the justic system is as fair and transparent as it can ever be, that the pinnacles of perfection who sit with their wigs and gavels can do no wrong. Everyone goes after the lawyers, but it is the system that makes it profitable for lawyers to fight a case in the morning and go to lunch together in the afternoon, as many men have been dismayed to find out.

Michael Cox, 43, had argued that their three children spent half their lives with him and that he should not therefore have to pay the Child Support Agency (CSA) for the time that they spent with their mother. Cox – a legal adviser to the campaign group Fathers 4 Justice – called the system “oppressive, unjust and discriminatory” towards men.

The court was told yesterday that Cox was required to pay £365 a month in maintenance to his former wife, Lesley Peach, 39, but she did not have to pay anything to him.

In March, Cox, who has five children, was given a 42-day prison sentence for failing to pay the charge, but the sentence was suspended on condition that he began to pay monthly instalments.

Yesterday he heavily criticised the CSA as he was jailed for 42 days. A letter from Ms Peach was read out in court begging magistrates not to give Cox a custodial sentence because of the impact on her family. Prosecutors said that his former wife would appreciate more financial support.

Cox, who represented himself, told Southampton Magistrates’ Court: “I have been referred to as an absent father, but that’s not what I am. I’m a father who well knows the obligation to his children and I discharge that obligation. I feed all of my children, I clothe them, I house them – that’s what I spend my money on. The Child Support Agency gives me no assistance for that and requires me to spend the money twice. I say that makes it oppressive, unjust and discriminatory in its action. In this case you have two established families living in equilibrium.
My ex-wife lives a mile away from me and the children pass easily between the two households. They spend half of the time with me and half of the time with their mother.
My ex-wife is not a little old lady living in a shoe, reaching in the back of a cupboard for the last tin of beans. This is not about the law. According to the law I’m dead in the water – I’m bang to rights.”

Cox asked magistrates to show discretion and spare him jail so that he could continue to earn money to pay for the care of his children.

Tom Concannon, for the prosecution, said that since the couple separated in 1994 Cox had amassed debts to the CSA of £45,000. The court was told that Cox was required to pay because the children were officially resident with their mother.

In a letter to magistrates, Ms Peach said that if her former husband were sent to jail, she would have to give up her job to look after the children.

Reacting to the sentence, Cox, of Hythe, Southampton, said: “It is outrageous that people are released early from prison for serious crimes and yet I’m being locked up as a caring father.”

You talk to somebody and once you even mention blaming the court system, the government or feminism, people look at you like you're from the fucking moon. Like you're a conspiracy theorist who thinks that the government puts fluoride in the water for the mind-control rays. Feminism especially, since people have a space in their heart devoted to women, whether they're women themselves or men. Feminism is the sacred cow of the west.

Off-Topic: You know, its no accident that anyone with a conspiracy theory is treated as a nutjob in the media. Its no accident that its the pot-smoking hippies who always come up with zany conspiracy theories in movies and other fiction. Its no accident that the wildest, most off-the-hook nutjobs are chosen to represent the most off-the-wall conspiracy theories in the media.

The MSM has long ceased to be our friend. They're there to represent themselves, and if turning into a government-propaganda channel is what fills their balance sheet, they'll do it. In the blink of an eye.


  1. Pete:

    I just don't know how many news stories have to be published and how many more examples we need to post on our blogs to get men to understand that they cannot under any circumstances have sex with these ungrateful, golddigging skanks, marital or extramarital.

    It is utterly irrelevant whether the woman in question might actually have some sense and/or compassion, because the legal system is 100% intentionally designed to screw men. The West is an exceedingly dangerous environment in which to marry, cohabit, or have casual sex, even if a woman is absolutely above reproach in her behavior.

  2. Male samizdat, this is the territory that comes with doing a blog instead of a website. Ultimately you end up repeating things, but that's OK because:
    a) Repeating things drills it into the mind better.

    b) Readers change, new readers come in, old readers get girlfriends and abandon the movement.

    c) Repeating things drills it into the mind better. :-P

  3. Well, it sure isn't hard to find material for repetition. Just go to Google News and enter "feminism" or "single mother" or "divorce". Degeneracy on parade - lots of blogging fodder there.