Let's see... The man's rights under the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 14th amendment (there may be more) are being violated, and don't forget Title 18 USC 241-242, not to mention sec 42 USC 1983. This could mean an eight-digit Federal court award for that man, then serious Federal CRIMINAL charges for the KGB wannabes, from the jackass judge all the way down to arresting officers. This is what "authorities" like THAT are MOST AFRAID OF.

The way citizens read the law and the way the system processes it are as different as day and night. You are probably right in the abstract, but did you hear about the Supreme Court decision just yesterday? Strip searches for traffic warrants? This is the weather. Saying how great things are when the sun is shining doesn't take away the storm. If men are serious about any of this in legal terms, just listing violations against us and checking the PO box for a government check for the damages is going to be a long wait. We need to get serious about draft legislation, legal forums and resources for men by men, real-world solutions to down-on-the-ground situations.

I have been saying all along that the Facebook guy's civil rights are essentially a moot point because of the restraining order. Try arguing your way out of a contempt citation on free-speech grounds. A courthouse is a workplace, and an argument like that is worth days and days of water cooler gossip throughout the building, and not much more.

We have to do a lot better, show our literacy in the system and not just the law as written, and above all choose our heroes and martyrs wisely. I don't think that is what has happened here.

Quote from Unregistered

Let's see... The man's rights under the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 14th amendment (there may be more) are being violated, and don't forget Title 18 USC 241-242, not to mention sec 42 USC 1983. This could mean an eight-digit Federal court award for that man, then serious Federal CRIMINAL charges for the KGB wannabes, from the jackass judge all the way down to arresting officers. This is what "authorities" like THAT are MOST AFRAID OF.

They operate under different rules than we do, though.

This is where real activism parts company with cause-based online entertainment. Activism is boring, mundane, frustrating and generally unsuccessful. People stay with it because they believe in a long-term goal, and the idealism of thinking that we can have our rights upheld by simply reminding our oppressors that we have rights, vanishes over time with the experience of laboring away on single cases, one agonizing, tedious case at a time. Once in a while such a case gets to a larger audience, mostly not.

Activists are above all caseworkers, and lofty generalizations about rights and freedoms have little place in the process. All I'm trying to say is that this particular case is not a very good one, and pedestalizing this guy is a big distraction from benefitting all men and fathers by formulating realistic goals, drafting legislation, creating contact networks for real work beyond moralistic chatting on sympathetic websites.

Truthfully, this viralistic reaction to this story looks to me more like desperation than anything else. Men are so short on heroes and role models and success stories in this struggle that we latch on to the first guy howling "victim!" and do little to scrutinize whether hitching an entire idea to one man's Google-era self-lawyering is even a good idea.

Quote from dinohip51

This is where real activism parts company with cause-based online entertainment. Activism is boring, mundane, frustrating and generally unsuccessful. People stay with it because they believe in a long-term goal, and the idealism of thinking that we can have our rights upheld by simply reminding our oppressors that we have rights, vanishes over time with the experience of laboring away on single cases, one agonizing, tedious case at a time. Once in a while such a case gets to a larger audience, mostly not.

Activists are above all caseworkers, and lofty generalizations about rights and freedoms have little place in the process. All I'm trying to say is that this particular case is not a very good one, and pedestalizing this guy is a big distraction from benefitting all men and fathers by formulating realistic goals, drafting legislation, creating contact networks for real work beyond moralistic chatting on sympathetic websites.

Truthfully, this viralistic reaction to this story looks to me more like desperation than anything else. Men are so short on heroes and role models and success stories in this struggle that we latch on to the first guy howling "victim!" and do little to scrutinize whether hitching an entire idea to one man's Google-era self-lawyering is even a good idea.

You argue that many activists conform to listless stereotypes, but then your negative counterargument falls into the very same moral quagmire? What's your grand alternative?

Quote from dinohip51

This is where real activism parts company with cause-based online entertainment. Activism is boring, mundane, frustrating and generally unsuccessful. People stay with it because they believe in a long-term goal, and the idealism of thinking that we can have our rights upheld by simply reminding our oppressors that we have rights, vanishes over time with the experience of laboring away on single cases, one agonizing, tedious case at a time. Once in a while such a case gets to a larger audience, mostly not.

Activists are above all caseworkers, and lofty generalizations about rights and freedoms have little place in the process. All I'm trying to say is that this particular case is not a very good one, and pedestalizing this guy is a big distraction from benefitting all men and fathers by formulating realistic goals, drafting legislation, creating contact networks for real work beyond moralistic chatting on sympathetic websites.

Truthfully, this viralistic reaction to this story looks to me more like desperation than anything else. Men are so short on heroes and role models and success stories in this struggle that we latch on to the first guy howling "victim!" and do little to scrutinize whether hitching an entire idea to one man's Google-era self-lawyering is even a good idea.

The more we bring egregious behavior to light by the courts and government, the more we get folks interested. We need boots on the ground agitating and letting the people in power know that we are not going away and are going to FTSU when possible in elections, local , state, and federal. By getting light shone on the cockroaches that inhabit our judiciary, perhaps we can get the elected boobs to sponsor legislation that benefits men.

Quote from Unregistered

Let's see... The man's rights under the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 14th amendment (there may be more) are being violated, and don't forget Title 18 USC 241-242, not to mention sec 42 USC 1983. This could mean an eight-digit Federal court award for that man, then serious Federal CRIMINAL charges for the KGB wannabes, from the jackass judge all the way down to arresting officers. This is what "authorities" like THAT are MOST AFRAID OF.

Err, 8 digit award Gracie? In federal court? What planet are you from? Federal courts are notoriously stingy with payouts unless you are an oil company or an agricultural concern with just as much money paid in donations to the political parties in power.

One day, surely things are going to reach boiling point? Exactly how much shit can men see imposed on other men, for no other reason than their gender, before they collectively take a stand? I speak not as a violent individual; but more as one who realises that everyone has a breaking point.

But men have reached their breaking point.

Look at the recent article's about Australia and the U.K(I am not searching for them).

Men are finally waking up and showing their voting power.

Unreal-Sickening-Actions, and poor kiddie-In-Middle watching the circus freak show.

Surely this joker judge will be given the budge and fired for such faux pa?

Then the wife could be sentenced for being a fake bake and impaled upon sharp wooden stake to restore calm to the lake?

Judge Judy wouldn't hesitate?