Until Death [or Dementia] Do Us Part? Robertson Says It Is OK To Divorce Spouses With Alzheimer’s

The marriage vows may say “for better or for worse” and “in sickness and in health,” but Rev. Pat Robertson told his “700 Club” viewers that divorcing a spouse with Alzheimer’s is just fine. Robertson says that the vows say “until death do us part” and Alzheimer’s should be viewed as a type of death.

Robertson was asked on this television program for advice for a friend whose wife has started suffering from Alzheimer’s and has started to see another woman. Robertson responded “I know it sounds cruel, but if he’s going to do something, he should divorce her and start all over again, but make sure she has custodial care and somebody looking after her.”

When he was reminded of that vows concerning “for better or for worse” and “until death do us part,” Robertson explained “If you respect that vow, you say ’til death do us part.’ This is a kind of death.”

I have always been fascinating by these programs with Muslim or Jewish or Christian figures dispensing advise to the faithful. No one ever asks, “are you just making this stuff up as you go along?” This seems a pretty massive change in the plain meaning of those vows. I hate to lawyer the language, but what is the basis for this new interpretation that the term “death” extends beyond the obvious meaning of the end of life and can include constructive death. It brings a new meaning to the phrase “you are dead to me.”

Source: Yahoo
___

182 thoughts on “Until Death [or Dementia] Do Us Part? Robertson Says It Is OK To Divorce Spouses With Alzheimer’s

  1. Sometimes the Alzheimer’s patient strikes up a romance with another patient in the Alzheimer’s facility as in the case of Sandra Day O’Connor’s husband. He had no memory of Sandra Day O’Connor. She did not divorce him, and he died a couple years later.

  2. What did he say…You have to be kidding me…Right….is he setting up the pathway to try and get Newt forgiveness…..Hmmm..

  3. Catullus – that was my first thought.
    Spincitysd – why insult vicious little trolls?

    WIth Pat is all about what is best for Pat. There has never been a move during his public life that was not designed to make more money or bring more attention to Pat. He follows the first commandment religiously but instead of the Christian God Pat has put himself.

  4. “Pat Robertson told his “700 Club” viewers that divorcing a spouse with Alzheimer’s is just fine.”

    ““are you just making this stuff up as you go along?””

    It definitely sounded like he was just making it up as he went along. It didn’t sound like he said it was just fine.

    But let’s face it, we as progressives are having our poutrage with Pat because what he said is hypocritical, not because we ourselves, as self-identified, smug progressives actually believe in till death do us part. Everyday we get and give lots of advice to couples to divorce and not to stick it out, and not because of violence, but because of various degrees of unhappiness.

    Anyway, assuming it embeds properly:

    It’s Pat

  5. When people clapped at the Tea Party Debate saying it was okay to allow some one to die,who was unable to afford medical care.

    When Perry was applauded at the debate at the Reagan Library for being the Execution governor.

    Now this.

    The Kool Aid is no longer being drank,its being injected.

  6. Has anybody checked on the health status of his wife?

    Is another kind of death when a couple stops loving each other?

    How about in a permanet vegetave state? (Terri Schivo).

    How about when you meet a hot babe?

  7. “we as progressives are having our poutrage with Pat because what he said is hypocritical, not because we ourselves, as self-identified, smug progressives actually believe in till death do us part.”

    Anon,

    Actually the statistics don’t bear that out since the blue State divorce rate is lower. The simple truth is the greater the public piety, the greater the hypocrite. This has been true for many thousands of years. Robertson is and always has been a self-serving charlatan.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/10/opinion/10douthat.html
    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126653602

  8. You have got to be kidding me. Robertson must have blacked out the part of his bible that says a husband should love his wife as Christ loved the church and gave His life for it (Eph 5:25). Wonder if Jesus would kick Pat to the curb because he contracted Alzheimers then negate his salvation because Pat forgot he was a child of God? Never.

  9. “we as progressives are having our poutrage with Pat because what he said is hypocritical, not because we ourselves, as self-identified, smug progressives actually believe in till death do us part.”

    Anon,

    Actually the statistics don’t bear that out since the blue State divorce rate is lower.

    Mike, I recognize that that is true, but that doesn’t mean that we still don’t give and get lots of advice from so called progressives that it’s okay to divorce for almost no reason. It’s almost a known film genre. It’s what various advice columnists from Salon and elsewhere give out. It’s a feminist meme.

    Dump the old bastard.

    What’s different here is that it’s a woman with Alzheimer’s so we are all much more sympathetic.

  10. My older sister has Alzheimer’s/Dementia. She had acted strangely for a few years before she was officially diagnosed, but once it was confirmed, her husband of 50 years immediately moved her into their daughter’s home because “he couldn’t deal with it.” He hasn’t seen her since.

    My heart breaks every day over this. Pat Robertson is a horrid person who seeks financial gain above all.

  11. just read this response on another site,
    A man went to see his Alzheimer-afflicted wife every day in the care facility for years. She did not know him at all. Finally, his daughter said, “Dad, Mom doesn’t know you at all. Why do you still visit her?” “Because I still know who SHE is,” he replied, “and as long as I still know who SHE is, I will continue to visit her.”

  12. Mike,

    You know all those “progressives” like Newt Gingrich who thinks it’s okay to divorce their wives just because they’ve got new women in their lives.

    *****

    “Mike, I recognize that that is true, but that doesn’t mean that we still don’t give and get lots of advice from so called progressives that it’s okay to divorce for almost no reason. It’s almost a known film genre. It’s what various advice columnists from Salon and elsewhere give out. It’s a feminist meme.”

    anon,

    Really? Progressives think it’s okay to divorce someone for no reason? Can you provide links to the Salon articles written by the advice columnists of which you speak?

  13. I found Robertson oddly compassionate and human for a change. Not at all in keeping with his brand of Christianity.

    My late husband had dementia. It’s exactly as Robertson’s says “walking death”. When you’ve been in marriage with someone who is “gone” in every sense but the physical one then perhaps you’ll understand it better. Until then maybe you shouldn’t use it to promote political agendas.

  14. Every couple whom I have ever married has been required to say the following:

    Standard Episcopal Church Vows

    Groom
    In the name of God, I, (name), take you, (name), to be my wife,
    to have and to hold from this day forward,
    for better or worse, for richer or poorer,
    in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish,
    until we are parted by death.
    This is my solemn vow.

    Bride
    In the name of God, I, (name), take you, (name), to be my husband,
    to have and to hold from this day forward,
    for better or worse, for richer or poorer,
    in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish,
    until we are parted by death.
    This is my solemn vow.

    Pat Robertson is not a valid spokesman for Christiany.
    Br. Jeremy, CSJW

  15. Blouise,

    I’m a progressive from a Blue State who has been married for forty-two years. I should add that I dated my husband for more than seven years before we got married.

  16. “LB
    1, September 15, 2011 at 1:05 pm
    just read this response on another site,
    A man went to see his Alzheimer-afflicted wife every day in the care facility for years. She did not know him at all. Finally, his daughter said, “Dad, Mom doesn’t know you at all. Why do you still visit her?” “Because I still know who SHE is,” he replied, “and as long as I still know who SHE is, I will continue to visit her.”

    Can’t get much deeper than that.

  17. Blouise,

    “So much for sweeping generalities regarding progressives.”

    There are times when that’s all some people have when it comes arguing for “their” side of an issue.

  18. Brother Jeremy,

    The Episcopal Book of Common Prayer is my favorite meditation tool. The silver thread runs through the book.

    Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

  19. Ann, I am so sorry for the painful experience you went through. I’ve been married for almost 25 years and love my husband with all of my heart. I cannot imagine going through such an experience.

    Having said that, I do not find Pat’s comments compassionate or humane. I think it promotes a dangerous tendency by fundamentalist Christians to define life or death as they see fit. Case in point, Pat states the wife is technically dead. But since when do you divorce a dead person. The very remedy that he provides to the writer suggest that in the eyes of the law, regardless of the stage of Alzheimers, the person is still very much alive.

    Divorcing someone releases the parties from any personal obligation they feel towards each other. I agree with the sentiments expressed by the man who told his daughter it doesn’t matter if she doesn’t know who I am. Indeed. I stood at that altar almost 25 years ago and swore before God Almighty and all of my family and friends that I would be with this man for richer or for poorer, in sickness and in health until death we do part. To so call move on with my life, when my spouse is at his most vulnerable, in my opinion, is the height of selfishness. We do the same thing to our aging parents and grandparents. And we call ourselves a Christian nation.

    This is a complicated issue for sure and I do not pretend to have the answers. If life begins at the moment of conception, as the CF folks assert, than death begins the moment the person takes his or her last breath, not a moment before. If that is the case then perhaps the CF need to revise its wedding vows to state until death do we part, except in the case of late stage Alzheimers,cancer,brain trauma, etc. etc. etc.

  20. From the 21st century bible as translated by Pat Robertson:

    The 2nd Book of the 700 club, verse 38- 40:

    38 Thou shalt not divorceth thine wife unless thou haveth a PET scan or CAT scan showing that she hath brain death or A horrible disease that has caused her to have lost the ability to be a proper wife or will probably will loseth that ability in the future. For she is dead in kind of a way.

    39 And tho, know this If a woman whose husband has had a PET or CAT scan and he has brain death or a horrible disease that has caused him to have lost the ability to be a proper husband or will probably will loseth that ability in the future, She shall not divorceth him because she shall always be subordinate to him.

    40 And contributions should be sent to Pat Robertson or The 700 Club. No personal checks tho knowest that a cashiers check is always pleasing in Our eyes. Visa and Mastercard Accepted. Amen

  21. Ann: “My late husband had dementia. It’s exactly as Robertson’s says “walking death”. When you’ve been in marriage with someone who is “gone” in every sense but the physical one then perhaps you’ll understand it better. ”

    Not for nothing Ann, but I spent nearly five years (2005-2010) looking after my father suffering from dementia to keep my promise that I wouldn’t let him wind up alone staring at a wall in a nursing home. Keeping him home comforted him and brought him back from those bouts with panic and assuaged his anxieties; even at the very end.

    If Pat Robertson hadn’t already revealed to the world that he’s the furthest thing from Christ with his hit squad remarks a few years ago, that soul-less prick sealed the deal with this recent comment.

  22. Jo Atkins,
    You bring up a valid point. I bet Pat’s answer would have been far different if the person writing in stated that it was the husband who was incapacitated.

    And to think back in the 80’s I was a staunch Republican and wanted him to run for president.

  23. Carol

    I liked your post.

    Pat put himself on TV speaking on God’s behalf. A bold move indeed, and not one recommended by the New Testament.

    Alzheimer’s is a serious question and the issues raised about life, love, marriage are probably areas where fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

    You mentioned Terri Shiavo, and that situation was also one in which many fearlessly expressed an opinion on a situation that I think was beyond their ability to disentangle. Or interest to learn about.

  24. Erykah, Yes I believe he would have put himself in the place of a sick husband being abandoned and I also see him putting himself in the place of the husband having to be burdened with a sick wife. I would be very uncomfortable if I was his wife. EEEEEEKKKKKKKKKKK I just gave myself the shivers with that statement. Was the woman who read him the question his wife or a cohost? Does anyone know? She seemed a little uncomfortable with his statements tho she recovered and sat submissive accepting as a good lil woman should. .ICK

  25. @Elaine,

    What I said: “Mike, I recognize that that is true, but that doesn’t mean that we still don’t give and get lots of advice from so called progressives that it’s okay to divorce for almost no reason. … It’s almost a feminist meme.”

    How you misrepresented it:

    “Really? Progressives think it’s okay to divorce someone for no reason?”

    http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/article7070174.ece

    Germaine Greer: ‘I admire women who divorce’
    Feminism hasn’t failed. In the workplace and the family, it’s only just getting started, writes The Female Eunuch author

    Surely feminism has failed. Look about you. Semi-clad ladettes lying drunk in the gutters, little girls dressed in sugar pink from head to foot, padded bras for four-year-olds, WAGs and supermodels bumping British casualties in Afghanistan off the headlines. Obviously, feminism has fallen flat on its face. And I, as high priestess of that minority cult, must be deeply disappointed.

    Who am I to sit in judgment? An old woman who wrote a book 40 years ago? It wasn’t a very good book. I’ve written better ones since, but it was the best book I could write at the time. It wasn’t the book that made history; it was history that made the book. If women’s restlessness hadn’t been growing, if so many women hadn’t been sniffing the air for the scent of freedom, The Female Eunuch would have sunk without trace.

    It nearly did. The publishers had so little faith in it that they printed only 5,000 copies, and bound only 2,500 of them. They were sold out on the day of issue; the next 2,500 were bound and in bookstores three weeks later, and the same thing happened again.

    Why were the women of 1970 so dissatisfied? Their mothers had been perfectly happy with home duties, two and a half children, and what was left out of the pay packet after they had given the old man his beer and cigarette money, hadn’t they?
    Related Links
    Is motherhood a form of oppression?

    They probably hadn’t, but in those days divorce was a disgraceful admission of failure, and it was only for the rich. The underlying fact is that the breadwinner’s wages would no longer cover the rising cost of living. Homes had to be modernised. Indoor loos, fitted carpets, vacuum cleaners, washing machines, all kinds of new consumer goods were now indispensable. The housewife’s workload didn’t diminish. She still did all the same things; she just did them more often.

    More and more married women were having to find some kind of work simply to finance the family debt. The work they found was mostly underpaid drudgery, with no possibility of promotion and no way of negotiating better pay or conditions.

    Most of the housewives of the Sixties had worked before they were married; they had got used to managing their own money, and having space and time and friends of their own. Marriage, too, often meant a steep drop in their quality of life. They told their daughters not to be in too much of a hurry to settle down. Have some fun first, because there’s not much fun after. Women workers didn’t often rebel against their employers. When they did, the labour unions ignored them. The women who worked for the labour unions suffered the same discrimination in pay levels and conditions as other women workers.

    A nonsensical notion, that women were entitled to “equal pay for work of equal value” led to the institutionalisation of inequality in the workplace — women’s work was classified as of lesser value, simply because it was women’s work. The unionists should have known that work has no intrinsic value; it is worth what you can force the employer to pay for it. Not a penny more, not a penny less. They could have unionised women, taught them the techniques of collective bargaining, but they didn’t.

    At exactly the same time as automation was threatening their own elite status, the unions allowed a vast pool of female non-union labour to come into existence. These were women who were hungry for crumbs. They would work twice as hard as men for half the pay. Nowadays we are apt to hear voices raised in lamentation for the demise of the proud labouring man. He has nobody to blame but himself.

    In the Sixties people worried about what might happen if women workers brought home more bacon than their men. It didn’t often happen, but more and more working women were becoming aware that they were giving more value for less money.

    They were still massively economically disadvantaged because they had no access to credit. A single woman couldn’t borrow enough money to start a business or buy a house and a married woman was still to all intents and purposes femme couverte, able to operate only as half of her husband’s.

    Banks were slow to wake up to the fact that women’s credit performance is much better than men’s, but they got there in the end. Now we have a worldwide system of microcredit, based on giving small loans to women, who won’t spend the money on prostitutes, booze, gambling and cigarettes.

    The growth of women’s economic independence might have felt gradual but in historic terms it was sudden. The results were and continue to be staggering. They could be summed up as the continuing collapse of the patriarchal family.

    In the bad old days the father was head of the family; what he said went. The kids were fed and out of the way before he got home. If punishment was needed, he administered it. His word was law.

    When I was doing a Granada TV show called Nice Time with Kenny Everett in the late Sixties, we’d ask silly questions of families, on the beach at Blackpool, say — nothing challenging just simple sums and stuff. If the old man wasn’t there, the women would answer; if he was sitting in the next deckchair they’d simper and pass the question on to him. Unbelievable? We got it on film.

    As women’s economic independence increased, their tolerance of marital infidelity, and of emotional and physical abuse, diminished. If you ever doubted that family stability depended on the oppression of women, you now have the proof. The proportion of divorces rises so inexorably that my figures are probably already out of date. In the developed world 40 per cent or more of marriages end in divorce, typically after seven or eight years, with a year or two to establish separation and then the actual divorce. Most of these divorces are initiated by wives. This is proper change. There’s no going back from here.

    A woman who walks away from a marriage in which she has invested all her emotional energy for years is doing something heroic. She knows that the status of her family will slide down two notches as soon as it becomes a single- parent family. She knows that though she might work all the hours that God sends, she will struggle. She will be unable to afford a good haircut, nice clothes, a late-model car or holidays. She will find it harder to find a job and even harder to keep it.

    Her ex-husband’s prospects of remarriage are nearly twice as good as hers, and — this is truly shocking — he will be wealthier after his divorce than he would have been if he had stayed married. If her children do well, she will get no praise. If they screw up, she will get all the blame. And yet she does it.

    She chooses an honourable life of hardship against servile acquiescence in a marriage that is rotten. I admire such women more than I can easily say.

    Disappointed? As if. Reality is what counts. Not Page Three, not the exploding world of pornography in cyberspace, not Katie Price.

    The media tend to think that the fantasies they peddle are realer than real. But in the real world, women have changed; bit by bit, they are growing stronger and braver, ready to begin the actual feminist revolution. The feminist revolution hasn’t failed, you see. It has only just begun.

  26. Robertson’s words run counter to everything my parents taught me about the relationship of one family member to another.

    Back before Alzheimer’s was known as Alzheimer’s my father’s aunt (his deceased mother’s sister) came to live with us. After 10 years of sharing our home, dinnertable, and family vacations, she started acting “weird”. She would wonder off and get lost. She’d forget that the burner was on and start kitchen fires. Eventually, for her own safety, my parents found a lovely “senior home” and we moved her in.

    She lived there for the next 15 years and for the last 7 of those years had no lucid moments. My parents visited with her every week and my three teenaged brothers and I were expected to visit her twice a month. She was part of our family and, having had no children of her own, we were her family. Occasionally my brothers would complain for she no longer recognized any of us but my father was adamant as to our responsibility as her family.

    I named my youngest daughter after my great aunt.

    I truly do not understand people like Robertson at all.

  27. http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_15345438

    Women getting feet under them after “gray divorce”

    If any couple had long- term relationships figured out, it was Al and Tipper Gore. At least that’s what we thought.

    People were shocked and disappointed to learn that the former vice president and his wife were getting divorced after 40 years of marriage and raising four kids. What could cause a seemingly solid couple to crumble after making it work for so long?

    Divorce experts say baby boomers such as the Gores (Al is 62 and Tipper is 61) are the first generation of older people who aren’t going to be sticking it out no matter what.

    Census data from 2004 show fewer marriages standing the test of time. For people who wed between 1955 and 1984, those reaching their 20th anniversary dropped 20 percent.

    Most people who divorce do so early in their marriage. Census data from 2001 shows first marriages that end in divorce last about eight years. Even though there has been a slight decline in the overall divorce rate, there has been a rise in late-life “gray divorce” — split-ups of people between 50 and 59 — to about 40 percent for men and women, according to Erica Manfred, a New York boomer-divorce expert and author of “He’s History, You’re Not: Surviving Divorce After 40.”

    Unhappiness, emotional estrangement and drifting apart are among the reasons more boomers are single than any previous cohort of 40- to 60-somethings, according to Manfred,

    “I think their marriage is very instructive in that people need to realize if the Gores can drift apart, so can you if you don’t do anything about it,” says Manfred, whose 18-year marriage ended in divorce when she was 58.

    Los Angeles-based psychotherapist Phyllis Goldberg, who specializes in women after divorce, finds when boomer women aren’t happy in a relationship, they seek change for fulfillment. “They want their husbands to come in and get marital counseling,” Goldberg said. “And if the men don’t come, the women will stay at it and reach a decision” — namely, separation or divorce.

    More so than men, women begin to look back on their lives and think about what their interests and passions were before marriage, says Rosemary Lichtman, who with Goldberg developed HerMentorCenter.com, an online community that coaches women through midlife health, relationship and career issues.

    “The biggest thing was knowing I was approaching 50 and thinking I didn’t want to live the rest of my life married to someone I no longer loved,” says Mandy Walker, a 52-year-old Niwot resident who divorced her husband in 2007 after 17 years of marriage.

    “Over the years, you give up a part of your life for your children, a part for your husband and a part for your work,” she says. “You are left wondering, ‘Where is the part that’s left for me?’ ”

    When the financial-services company Walker had worked at for more than 20 years closed its Colorado office, a generous severance package became an opportunity for a second career. Walker decided to get her master’s degree in journalism at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

    On her website, sincemydivorce sincemydivorce.com, Walker interviews women about their life after divorce. She also shares her experiences — from having to get rid of the dead mouse in the trap to dealing with Internet outages.

    “I realized I would be OK once I could manage routine stuff around the house on my own,” says Walker

  28. You wrote:

    @Elaine,

    What I said: “Mike, I recognize that that is true, but that doesn’t mean that we still don’t give and get lots of advice from so called progressives that it’s okay to divorce for almost no reason. … It’s almost a feminist meme.”

    How you misrepresented it:

    “Really? Progressives think it’s okay to divorce someone for no reason?”

    *****

    You wrote that “so called progressives” give advice that it’s okay to divorce for almost no reason. Did I misrepresent what you said because I didn’t include the world “almost” in my question?

    If so, I’ll correct it. Here you go: Progressives think it’s okay to divorce someone for almost no reason?

  29. Elaine, most of my comments are getting filtered out, so I’ll just say that yes, leaving out “almost” substantially changes what I wrote. And I think the Germaine Greer article helps demonstrate my point that progressives encourage divorce for almost no reason and that it’s a feminist meme.

  30. “Dad, Mom doesn’t know you at all. Why do you still visit her?” “Because I still know who SHE is,” he replied, “and as long as I still know who SHE is, I will continue to visit her.”

    LB,

    Thank you. That is the essence of what commitment to a relationship means.

    “Pat Robertson is not a valid spokesman for Christiany.”

    Br. Jeremy,

    Quite true, nor for humanity either.

  31. Anon, “But let’s face it, we as progressives are having our poutrage with Pat because what he said is hypocritical, not because we ourselves, as self-identified, smug progressives actually believe in till death do us part.”

    Speak for yourself, from many personal stories told here that statement is false and insulting. Like a comedian once said: I’ve never considered divorce. Murder, but never divorce.

    erykah @ at 2:59 pm, excellent statement regarding the redefinition of ‘living’. That’s a whole ‘nother slippery slope I’d rather not have people like Robertson weighing in on. He called the removal Ms. Schiavo’s feeding tube “judicial murder,” but she was also already as dead in light of his current statement. Why keep Ms. Schiavo alive? Or grandma with Alzheimer’s I’m thinking that it’s Mr. Robertson that needs to be worried about the onset of Alzheimer’s, hope his wife or kids stick around to take care of him.

    Here’s the situation for a number of people though and it has little to do with spiritual nature of the debate: Alzheimer’s is one of many diseases that force a couple to contemplate divorce for purely financial reasons and Alzheimer’s is probably one of the diseases that force that choice most often because it can render an adult completely dependant at an age that doesn’t involve other life-threatening illness. The spouse can be dependant for a long, long time.

    In the state where I live if a person needs to be sent to a skilled nursing facility for skilled nursing services it can cost up to 8K a month depending on the facility. I have done this research personally. I also have personal experience with facilities at the low end of the cost spectrum and liken them to the local city dog pound.

    If a couple runs through their savings (which they do quickly since insurance companies don’t cover custodial care) and needs Medicaid there is a max amount of assets and income allowed for the couple. The amount of income and assets are state determined, some states allow more and some allow less. This is to protect the spouse in the community from being impoverished by the illness of the partner.

    If the amount of income allowed is such that the community spouse can’t cover their needs, then divorce, early on in the illness, is the most viable option to maintain both spouses at an acceptable level of self and custodial care. The community spouse can maintain the bulk of the assets, choose and pay the nursing home the difference between Mediaid and the actual cost and still live at a reduced but decent level in the community. There are other ins and outs to make that work but suffice it to say, sometimes divorce is the best that a loving couple can do for each other.

    I would hope to think that this kind of situation was what weighed on Robertson’s mind but he needs to spell it out, otherwise he’s just a hypocrite.

  32. “The media tend to think that the fantasies they peddle are realer than real. But in the real world, women have changed; bit by bit, they are growing stronger and braver, ready to begin the actual feminist revolution. The feminist revolution hasn’t failed, you see. It has only just begun.”

    Anon,

    You’ve clarified your comments and with that clarification I find there are many areas where we agree. The media does like slogans and sound bites and many in the Woman’s Movement loved media attention so gave them the outrageous quotes being sought. However, as you lightly touched on this was in the context of an belief system, fostered by religion, that divorce is a sin. How many Catholic women for instance were urged not to leave their husbands in the face of abuse, alcoholism or unfaithfulness? The knife cut both ways and neither way works because try as pontificators might each relationship is unique unto itself.

    My mother had 7 heart attacks and three strokes during the 20 year duration of her marriage to my father. He cared for and doted on her through all those times. This was a man who was devastatingly attractive to women. He felt committed. When she died he was offered marriage by two very wealthy women who he dated and he turned them down. Twelve months after my mother’s death this large, strong man died of a heart attack, at age 54. My brother and I believe to this day it was from a broken heart. In the two months before he died he had stopped going out with women.

    I believe that divorce is and should be a viable option for people. However, I also believe to the depths of my soul that I am committed to the women I’m with, whatever comes to pass. I wouldn’t force my belief on others. What I find rancid in Robertson is that this man obviously has already moved on, he has a new woman and Pat’s answer was rather unexpected from the pious fraud who talks so easily of family values.

  33. I definitely agree that Robertson is a pious fraud.

    And I heartily applaud and sadly have reason to be envious to all of you that have been able to make your marriages work through thick and thin.

    I do think, that if we are honest with ourselves, we will acknowledge that when we hear of a woman who has divorced late in life, we often say, or are encouraged to say, “You go girl”, and that’s basically sexism in action.

    Lottakatz, I never considered divorce or murder. But a self-described feminist progressive woman did. (And then the blood-sucking lawyers latched on like a vampire bat at a milk farm.)

    Regarding Alzheimer’s it difficult, and I will not judge anyone in that position. But would we be so upset if the person being divorced or cheated on didn’t have Alzheimer’s but was in a long term coma? Would we be equally as upset if the person in that coma was a male, or a female?

    While it’s somewhat different, were we upset that Michael Schiavo had a relationship with someone else while his wife was on a feeding tube? Most progressives, like myself, wished Schiavo the best in his fight to have that feeding tube removed, and understood why he was in a new relationship and wished that well too.

    I don’t know the answers to this — at an early age I saw an older close relative in this situation and I was always troubled by how that was resolved(@LK, it did not involve murder.)

    So if you want to kick Robertson for being a hypocrite and fraud I’ll lend my (non-steel toe) boots. But I don’t think we can complain that his position is much different from any position we might take.

  34. “and that’s basically sexism in action.”

    should be

    “and that’s basically cultural misandry in action.”

  35. Bro. Jeremy:

    “Pat Robertson is not a valid spokesman for Christiany.”

    ***********************

    Nor a true Scotsman either it would seem.

  36. RP,
    You are either married or not. There is no grey area. I do recall a line that the priest told us, “until death do us part” and “in sickness and health”.

  37. RP,
    You are either married or not. There is no grey area. I do recall a line that the priest told us, “until death do us part” and “in sickness and health”.

    Well I refuse to excoriate or excommunicate Michael Schivavo over his scandalous affair. I am genuinely sorry to hear that you felt different.

  38. anon,

    I leave out the word “almost” and I misrepresent what you said–but it’s perfectly okay for you to use Germaine Greer as a stand-in for all progressives? Get real!

  39. Raffi, I’m a little rusty here, so can you tell me, according to your priest, do we have to stone Schiavo?

  40. Elaine,

    You asked for evidence that progressives think it’s okay to divorce people for almost no reason.

    I present one of the top progressives making exactly this suggestion within the past 18 months. Germaine Greer is at the top of the feminist pyramid. And the statement I quoted from is recent, from 2010.

    It is not surprising to me that you find you have to dismiss and deprecate her. Once again I observe that Intellectual honesty is not one of your core competencies.

  41. Robert,

    Where’s your evidence that I deprecated Germaine Greer? You cite Germaine Greer as an advocate of divorce and that is supposed to prove that progressives think it’s okay for people to divorce for almost no reason. Sheesh! You argue a lot like someone who hasn’t been around in a while. Something about your arguments seems oh so familiar.

    BTW, are you in the habit of reading articles written by feminazis?

    ;)

  42. @Elaine M

    “BTW, are you in the habit of reading articles written by feminazis?”

    I think I used that term once, and it was in sarcasm.

    Apart from that, I find it generally valuable to read all sorts of people. You may wish to broaden your horizons as well.

    I listed here two links, I think some more are in the spam queue, but the real question then is, since you don’t accept Germaine Greer as representative of true Scottish progressives, is how many citations could possibly every persuade you, and just what sorts of bonafides must they have if Germaine Greer can’t cut your mustard.

    @RP, we’re not talking about Robertson’s advice. Pretty sure everyone here has condemned most of what he has to say. I am concerned about the weird stuff your priest is insisting we do to Michael Schivo. I say let him alone, he’s suffered enough already.

  43. Robert,

    I’m supposed to accept the word of one person as representative of the beliefs of millions of people–including myself? Try again.

    Scottish progressives? I thought we were talking about people in the USA.

  44. SwM,

    According to the Urban Dictionary:

    a feminazi is NOT another word for a feminist. they are very different.

    feminists believe that women should have rights equal to men.

    feminazis believe that men should have no rights and should be killed.

    Feminazis do not encourage the killing of men. They believe in their natural extinction.

    According to Wikipedia:
    Feminazi is a term popularized by radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh. Feminazi is a portmanteau of the nouns feminist and Nazi. The term is used pejoratively by some U.S. conservatives to criticize feminists that they perceive as extreme. … Limbaugh credited his friend Tom Hazlett, an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, with coining the term.

    ————————————————————–

    So whoever called you a Feminazi was calling you a killer. I wouldn’t take that lightly.

  45. “Someone referred to me as a feminazi on another thread. That was a first.”

    Yeah, that may have been me. Well, you come here whenever you can with your uninformed bigotry and misandry. It’s really quite disgusting and typically leaves me with an upset stomach. Sometimes I have to lay down.

    I was taught to speak up to bigots, and tell them what’s what.

  46. @Elaine M.

    Earlier today (last night) you missed a wonderful Star Trek reference and I was dismayed. Now you miss the True Scotsman fallacy.

    Once again, I find my expectations for you, low as they, are far too high.

    So once again, I find to my chagrin that I need to apologize for oppressing you with my soft bigotry of moderate expectations of competency.

  47. “Gene H.
    1, September 15, 2011 at 10:23 pm

    Your slip is showing.”

    Yes, you’re right. I mean Raffi of course. The problem is, Robert Paulson is not my name.

  48. I did swm and if all else being equal , I’d say the same. I don’t appreciate being called a misogynist, would you like to be refered to as mysandry? Seems appropriate as the folks that disagree with you the most are males!

  49. Blouise, I thought it was a Rush Limbaugh thing..It was not RP unless there are more aliases involved. I am still grieving my dog and don’t want to listen to female bashing again. Don’t think these guys ever heard of misandry until LK used it.

  50. Quite to the contrary swm…Quite to the contrary…If you hadn’t taken the first continual verbal shots and yet you still not have apologized, what have you really learned in 20 some odd years….. I see nothing … I see people 6 months doing better than the ones with real experience…

    What, would it make you feel bad to learn how to say you were wrong at this stage in your life? I hear it builds character but you’ve got the time so you should really know better than I….

  51. RP,
    If you are talking to me when you refer to “raffi”‘, you keep suggesting that Schiavo is the issue He didn’t divorce his wife like Robertson suggested.

  52. You used the term woman hater… I do recall…

    What’s the real difference, you still can’t admit when you’re wrong…. Good job…. Going strong…. When you feel people getting upset with you…. Better start looking within for the answers… You can usually find the source of your ilfeelings.. You said that to me once…

  53. “If you are talking to me when you refer to “raffi”‘, you keep suggesting that Schiavo is the issue He didn’t divorce his wife like Robertson suggested.”

    I know, I know. He didn’t divorce his wife, he just had an extramarital affair.

    How do we punish that? Burning? Tar?

    So what Robertson, the pious hypocrite said was that the guy should divorce the woman and then continue to live an adult life. So we all jumped on Robertson. I had thought it odd because the evidence I see is that liberals often send messages encouraging women to divorce men over almost nothing at all.

    Then you came by to tell me, no, you and your priest take this shit seriously.

    So since Michael Schiavo had an affair when his wife was technically living but brain dead, I am wondering what the honorable way for us to punish him is, which I think you would agree we must do to demonstrate we’re not hypocrites like Pat Robertson who believes in divorce in such cases.

    HTH

  54. AY, it got old after day 2 when you pursued SM across every thread with overt as well as thinly concealed digs, Use the scroll wheel, that’s what it’s for if you’re still pissed. Don’t think this is a new refrain of mine, it’s not, you’re not the first person I’ve said this too: cross thread stalking is uncool, it taints perfectly good threads with old disputes. Give it a rest.

  55. LK,

    Your displeasure is noted. Now note the cross talk was not raised by I. Your point, as I said is taken, but please stick to the facts you know. Thank you. It is not cool to interrupt… Thanks…

  56. A word to the wise:

    Anonymity is the spritual foundation of all our Traditions, ever reminding us to place principles above personalities.

  57. SM, I’m sorry to hear about your dog, I had a kitty die-off in December and still mourn them. Losing a long-time companion is always difficult. My condolences.

  58. I’ve written two longish postings regarding Robertson, divorce and Schiavo- both just *disappeared*.

    Here’s the essence- marry anyone you choose, divorce whenever you choose, for whatever reason, it’s not the laws job to compel a broken or disadvantageous union. If I was in Terri’s condition I would hope the better half could find some comfort with someone else. If I married a good man, he would wish the same for me if the positions were reversed.

  59. @lottakatz, I agree 100% with you on this:

    “If I was in Terri’s condition I would hope the better half could find some comfort with someone else. If I married a good man, he would wish the same for me if the positions were reversed.”

    Also, those posts you lost, I bet they were terrific, because mine were some of my best.

  60. No doubt they were prizewinners all :-)

    On occasionally posts I type on this site just disappear and I don’t know if it’s my laptop or WordPress or some weird server glitch- the color of the comment field changes a bit and the ‘Guest’- ‘Log-in’ etc boxes become un-anchored and show up overlaid on the comment box and then they disappear!! I don’t know if I need a technician or a priest to fix it.

  61. “There have also been a few that I wish had been lost!”

    When I lose a post, I usually cross myself, spit over my shoulder, and thank the Gods of Ellen Feiss for looking after me.

  62. rafflaw, sometimes I take it as an omen that I should rethink the matter and come back to it later, maybe that posting just shouldn’t be made. That actually has proven to be true on a couple of occasions :-)

  63. Blouse,

    Your displeasure is to noted. Now, where were you when it was ok for one to make it a tradition to bash the male bashing personality?

    I don’t think you really think that just because I am unhappy with Obama that I would like someone else as president and the only options are the GOP field makes me a republican? And just because someone thinks I am a republican makes me a woman hater (misogynist)? That should be viewed with askance? Certainly not you too!

    A simple apology would suffice, don’t you think? Unless you as well think the same…

  64. LK,

    If you will read back on a few political threads…I was getting digs by SWM and had asked her off of the blawg…why…and she said she’d do what she wanted…

    If I posted something she disagreed with she’d make snarly remarks….But if we have two standards that’s fine…so long as I know the rules…I can play….

    I’ll just go back to doing what I do and you the same…ok…

  65. I’ve been blithely unaware of any sniping about feminism going on in other threads, or the parties to the sniping, but then it may all have gone above my head. The attacks on feminists and progressives though, using Germaine Greer’s words as an example, widely miss their mark in relevance.

    Unfortunately, the defining slogans of feminists and of progressives, are shaped by a hostile, derisive media. Just like Gloria Steinem and T.Grace Atkinson, Greer has been a media “go to” person when issues touching on feminism arise. Those three and a few others were used because they were basically “mediaphiles” and “fame junkies” who basked in their fame and profited from it. Thus MS Magazine started out as a leader in the field only to bog down as a sort of “Cosmopolitan how to manual” for women interested in rising through the corporate ladder.

    To me feminism is about the woefully long history of women being repressed/oppressed by social mores, religion and brute force. This behavior denied women power to affect society and in the process made it hostage to the aggression of testosterone. Males may be bigger and stronger but intellectually females are every bit their equals and in most instances surpass males in mature behavior.

    The suppression of females has been obvious to me since childhood and in my own alienation I felt common cause with it growing up. Where the “public face” of feminism went wrong was in the fact that the people out front were from the leisure or academic classes and so issued their
    pronouncements from their particular elite perspectives. This left our the viewpoints of strong, intelligent women, who may not have chosen, or had available, a career path recognized as upscale , but in their own lives asserted their equality. At times these “average” women were met by the obtuseness of male resistance and faced with the reality of not being given their due.

    The similarity with media progressives and media feminists derive from
    their lack of relationship to the masses they attempt to represent. They are all “hipper than thou” in this respect and thus hamper the progress of their movements by not building organizational structures that speak to
    a majority. That they have had some success at all is a tribute to the justice of their cause, rather than to the skill with which they’ve put it forth.
    This has been the one truth of the conservative/fundamentalist noise machine in identifying the “elitism” of the movements they oppose.

    Back to the topic at hand though, Robertson’s sin is not his inept phrasing of the proposition, but in his overall hypocrisy. This is the sin of the entire pro-life posture in that it claims a total love for the sanctity of life, but allows many glaring exceptions.

  66. Mike S.,

    I generally will give respect to a person…It is not based on race or gender…I generally will over look snarks….I make them…some intentional…some not….However, when I do ask someone not to be snarky and I am informed that they will do what they want…Then, I think we have a different standard set in motion…Then when I respond…I am called a Republican….a Woman Hater….which to my understanding is the is the hatred or dislike of women (Females) and then after I respond to that I am to be viewed with askance…. I do not think that this is fair in the least….and then I get called out for it….Oh well…that is just the way it goes…so long as I can recall the ABC’s……But it still kind of pisses me off….

  67. Another No True Scotsman argument as Germaine Greer and any other prominent dipshit feminist is drummed out of feminism, same as how prominent dipshit democrats are derided (and even how the Republicans will tell us that George W. Bush is a RINO and deny he was #1 Republican.)

    But worse, feminist theory and feminist policies and active feminist misandry are now ensconced in US Law, and in administrative policies in schools, and widely throughout society.

    That’s of course documented by FIRE and by many others.

    “Where the “public face” of feminism went wrong was in the fact that the people out front were from the leisure or academic classes and so issued their pronouncements from their particular elite perspectives.”

    That’s not the public face. That IS where feminist theories are formed.

    Regarding Robertson, who is indeed a 93% terrible person, Mike honestly, if you heard two identical stories, of an elderly couple, in which one partner had Alzheimer’s and the other did not. And the partner without Alzheimer’s was seeking a divorce so they could pursue other relationships, and the only difference between the two couples was the sex of the spouse with Alzheimer’s, are you telling me that you wouldn’t hold a great deal more sympathy to the woman seeking the divorce than to the man seeking the divorce?

    Castigate Robertson on his hypocrisy. His advice here is actually what most of us in other circumstances would call compassionate, realistic, grey, and nuanced.

    When you don’t call out swarthmore mom on her misandry, or mespo on his homophobic jokes are okay because he is a liberal, you are part of the problem. Quit being part of the problem.

  68. Anon,

    anon
    1, September 16, 2011 at 10:42 am
    ****
    When you don’t call out swarthmore mom on her misandry, or mespo on his homophobic jokes are okay because he is a liberal, you are part of the problem. Quit being part of the problem.
    _______
    Anon,

    I do not think that Mike S is part of the problem….I may not always agree with what he has said….But, I will defend his right to say it…..

    I also do not think that mespo is a homophobic…Please find me the post that he has indicated otherwise…..

    While I generally agree with some of what SWM has posted….when as you call it became Misandry towards myself….It was only because I agreed with the Professor about Huntsman and then it went on that thread it went down hill after that….I stated my opinion about Ann Richards…and apparently she could not accept my personal opinion….of someone I had drank with at one time….

    You are all over the board so it is hard to either agree or disagree with what you have stated……..but again…thanks for your statement….

  69. “Another No True Scotsman argument as Germaine Greer and any other prominent dipshit feminist is drummed out of feminism, same as how prominent dipshit democrats are derided (and even how the Republicans will tell us that George W. Bush is a RINO and deny he was #1 Republican.)”

    Anon,

    Slow down there please! I’m stating my opinion. I can’t drum anybody out of anything and BTW I’m not a Progressive even. My views represent me an me alone. Disagree or agree as you will, but please don’t elevate me to spokesman of anything but myself. My view is iconoclastic. What you seem to do is to put labels on things and put them into discrete mental boxes. I resent being so quickly categorized.

    “But worse, feminist theory and feminist policies and active feminist misandry are now ensconced in US Law, and in administrative policies in schools, and widely throughout society.”

    Unaware, you make my point. Let me give you an analogy. Brown vs. the
    Board of Ed. held that separate but equal education was unequal education. The liberal/progressive solution to this was bussing. The communities the kids were bussed into were almost all white, working class communities struggling to maintain their own school systems due to inadequate funding. The ensuing disputes set back the Civil Rights Movement and created hostility between potential natural allies. That’s the problem with elites setting the agenda and unfortunately their good intentions going to hell. Feminism same problem. Salary and workplace inequality still exist, despite some laws designed to make people feel better without upsetting the oppressive “applecart”.

    “are you telling me that you wouldn’t hold a great deal more sympathy to the woman seeking the divorce than to the man seeking the divorce?”

    Yes, dammit! Stop putting me into your imaginary little categories of what you think I would believe in different situations. Anon, you are guilty of what you accuse others of being guilty. You work from a few instances and then make sweeping generalizations.

    “Castigate Robertson on his hypocrisy. His advice here is actually what most of us in other circumstances would call compassionate, realistic, grey, and nuanced.”

    Context is everything and Robertson’s long history provides the context. I am positive that if he were giving advice on the same situation to a female it would be to stand by your man. Why do I think that? Because that is the essence of his movement, female subservience.

    “When you don’t call out swarthmore mom on her misandry, or mespo on his homophobic jokes are okay because he is a liberal, you are part of the problem. Quit being part of the problem.”

    First of all I don’t see any of the tendencies in either SWM or Mespo that you do. Secondly, you know my name and can Google me for a large body of writing where I express my beliefs and opinions. to say I’m part of the problem is a snide, sanctimonious joke and disparages my lifetime of activism.

  70. Lottakatz first used the term “misandry” and said that was not the case. One of these guys called me a feminazi and the other one the “v” word. Don’t need to defend myself or apologize to either of these men.

  71. Strange you can recall someone saying something about men hating but can’t recall a damn thing about someone calling someone a woman hater…Thanks so much…reality is an illusive concept from individual perspectives…

  72. AY,

    I’ve got to say that I’ve really been unaware of your dispute with SwM. That doesn’t mean it is non-existent, just that I didn’t know that the interchanges were wide ranging and/or discovered a pattern in my mind. We may not always agree is true, but I respect your point of view. I thought a lot of Ann Richards, but I’m not a Texan and only knew her from TV. I’m perfectly willing to accept your opinion of her from your personal experience. I don’t think I would personally like many Pols if I met them up close, or socially, which is one of the reasons i’ve stayed away from politics since my early dabbling. Others may not agree with you, so what?
    I know from your history here that you are perfectly capable of taking care of yourself and in any event I respect the integrity of your opinions, even if I always don’t agree with them.

  73. AY,

    While I am happy to support you, my beef with swm was derived differently. Agreeing with Mike I think, I was totally clueless you had a beef with swm. I have just witnessed swm over and over again making misandric statements and no one would call her on it. I have from time to time.

    Regarding mespo, in a recent thread, mespo made a pretty old, dull, “liberal meme joke” on Bachmann’s husband Marcus, calling him fat and gay:

    “Apologies in advance but, query: Will continued public dancing with an obviously gay Porky Pig lead to retardation?””

    Now, if a conservative said anything like this, mespo would be the first to call him out as a homophobe, but mespo and so many others here hide behind the “we’re liberals, we can’t be bigots”. At the same time, mespo is calling out Pat Robertson for his idiocy.

    Is mespo a homophobe?

    I am bored and disgusted with so many really stupid and arrogant and often offensive arguments and comments that are made by self-identified progressive and holier than thou commenters. n years of the net have driven much of the snark from me, since 99.999% of it is tired, old, stolen material that is used not to further an argument but to beat people up and to police speech and to bully.

    And a lot of that I do think has led to a lessening in dialogue with people that I disagree with, but who I am often surprised and pleased to find have much to teach me.

    I admire Professor Turley greatly, and I find what he blogs about interesting and often important. And yet, I am appalled at the arrogance, the assumed, elitist, self-congratulatory, taken for granted arrogance of so many of the commenters here, especially when their arguments are often so poor.

    I prefer arguments that fit the Monty Python ideal. It’s a shame how far below a 40 year old comedy sketch we are.

  74. Mike,

    If I understand your last comment, I think some of my disagreement revolves around this:

    ” despite some laws designed to make people feel better without upsetting the oppressive “applecart”.”

    This statement makes me think of laws that are useless but benign.

    The laws are not to designed to make people feel better without upsetting the oppressive applecart.

    The laws are pernicious, and intentionally designed that way. There is nothing benign about them. And it’s not just laws, it’s school policies regarding speech, regarding sexual harassment investigations. It’s employment practices.

    Read Christina Hoff Sommers on Catherine MacKinnon’s legacy. Read FIRE.

    Elsewhere,

    There are many ways to point out what an asshole Pat Robertson is. A weak way of pointing that out is by using a clip of him making a statement that most of us would agree with if spoken by anyone else, unless you make it clear your beef is not with what he said, but with his hypocrisy.

    And if you would think equal of the two couples, I apologize, because I think I’ve had so much misandry pumped into me by society, that I think I would think less of the man seeking the divorce than the woman. So that makes you by far the better person.

    I am glad to hear of all your wonderful activism.

    Regardless, if on these boards you are part of a community that overlooks mespo’s bullshit or swm’s bullshit, I don’t think your RL activism as remarkable and as wonderful and as far more important as it is, really gets you a pass.

    Letting swm spout her crap and saying nothing is made worse by your RL acts and reputation — because it says you are okay with her bullshit.

  75. “Regarding mespo, in a recent thread, mespo made a pretty old, dull, “liberal meme joke” on Bachmann’s husband Marcus, calling him fat and gay:

    “Apologies in advance but, query: Will continued public dancing with an obviously gay Porky Pig lead to retardation?””

    Now, if a conservative said anything like this, mespo would be the first to call him out as a homophobe, but mespo and so many others here hide behind the “we’re liberals, we can’t be bigots”. At the same time, mespo is calling out Pat Robertson for his idiocy.”

    Anon,

    Here is your problem in black and white, you excise context. Mespo’s joke was certainly appropriate in the context of criticizing a man running a facility to help “cure” homosexuality. It is an ironic comment. If you are saying that in an ironic context jokes like that are impermissible then you are guilty of the thinking you so criticize in others.

    As far as “if a conservative said” that is also out of context since most, though not all, of the prominent conservative voices are distinctly anti
    homosexual. Stop being what you complain others of being and please do give context a chance in your reading.

  76. anon
    1, September 16, 2011 at 11:46 am

    As to other parts of the post, it is noted….

    Now as to myself….

    “AY,

    While I am happy to support you, my beef with swm was derived differently. Agreeing with Mike I think, I was totally clueless you had a beef with swm. I have just witnessed swm over and over again making misandric statements and no one would call her on it. I have from time to time.”

    I guess so long as I was not the object of the attack…I did not look too closely…Not that I am the Victim….of falsehoods…I am angry….Not with WOMEN….but SWM….for implying that I am Republican….Just because I don’t like what has happened under the OBAMA administration…Which I think is the pulse of America….I would like for someone else to be president….Because I said that, it makes me a Republican….then somehow or another because it was stated that I am a Republican….then I hate women…..then because I responded to that…..I must be viewed with askance….All while asking SWM off of the Blawg to not personally attack me….This is what I got…Maybe she is not a man hater….she just hates you and me….

    I look at it like…How dare I defend myself from a vicious statement….Then I get attacked for cross threading….Well certain buzz words pop up then I’ll respond…

    I did a portion in a Masters Degree with “Control Question” Management in Surveying…

  77. “The laws are pernicious, and intentionally designed that way. There is nothing benign about them. ”

    Anon,

    You really must read closer. That was exactly why I brought up the “bussing” issue. I get that about laws. As it is most of my comments are far too long and so I hope that people who have read them through the years place them in the general context of what I write about and the opinions they are based on. I would need a tome to explain all the details of analysis that go into most of my comments and that would be inappropriate in this venue.

    “Letting swm spout her crap and saying nothing is made worse by your RL acts and reputation — because it says you are okay with her bullshit.”

    First of all I haven’t noticed a pattern of misandry in Swm’s many comments, but perhaps I’ve just missed it because other things got my attention. I spend 3 hours at least every day here and I’ve got a busy life beyond this blog, so I reserve my commentary for those things that most pique my interest. Were I to feel the necessity to comment on all that goes on here then it would be more than a full time job, it would be my life and I’ve got too many other things going for me. Besides, I access this site via computer, not I Phone or Blackberry. I’m also a very slow typist, who thinks about what he writes and so I lack the ability to comment on everything. To call me out on my lack of commentary on a specific issue, or person, is really a cheap shot and and a denigration of my integrity because I don’t view things through your context and vision.

    To give you an example of what you do you might accuse me of racism because I used the term denigration because of its roots in racism.

  78. I can’t stand Pat Robertson.

    That said, I think in this case he is right. Divorce does not necessarily mean abandonment.

    Why should straight spouses of Alzheimer patients have less rights the gay people? Why should they be denied hospital visits, blah blah blah (all the usual gay marriage talking points) when it comes to their “real” partners? I see this as more of a legal issue than a religious one.

    Add abandonment to the mix and I have a different opinion. It might be the smart thing to do, but not the right thing.

  79. The lack of honesty is nothing less than amazing. I need to move on and hope you anons can do the same both in your personal lives and on this blog.

  80. Today you said:

    “Swarthmore mom
    1, September 16, 2011 at 12:33 pm
    The lack of honesty is nothing less than amazing. I need to move on and hope you anons can do the same both in your personal lives and on this blog.

    Swarthmore mom
    1, September 16, 2011 at 12:51 pm
    I am only a convenient target for both of these guys’ anger.”

    I am not angry…Just defending the right to not be made the aggressor…Nor to be called a liar…I believe that you stated to me that I was a Republican, that I did not care about women…and that I was to be viewed with askance…the only direct one was the askance remark….

    I could not agree more that the lack of honesty is amazing is it not??????????

    You had previously stated and I responded:

    Swarthmore mom
    1, September 8, 2011 at 11:04 am
    AY, Keep searching for your “good” republican to replace “bad” Obama. Suppose you think Kagan and Sotomayor are worse than Alito and Roberts, too. Obviously women’s issues are of no concern.

    Anonymously Yours
    1, September 8, 2011 at 11:42 am
    “Swarthmore mom
    1, September 8, 2011 at 11:04 am
    AY, Keep searching for your “good” republican to replace “bad” Obama. Suppose you think Kagan and Sotomayor are worse than Alito and Roberts, too. Obviously women’s issues are of no concern.”

    Just like jacking me and stating that I am a republican….I have no opinion on Kagen or Sotomayor….So far they have not made any bonehead or egregious decisions….But that is just me….

    So as far as the statement you made: “Obviously women’s issues are of no concern.” It does not compute…people can disagree and still maintain a civil conversation….don’t you think…To disagree with someone does not mean that personal attacks are warranted….don’t you agree?

    As far as Good Republican, Good Democrat…..I as well as a number of folks are hoping someone good will be elected….it is pretty damn sad when you are not voting for someone, but against someone else…..a very sad state of affairs…you do agree?

    Swarthmore mom
    1, September 8, 2011 at 11:57 am
    AY Thought maybe you were a republican since you said you were a McCain supporter but did not say you were one.

    Anonymously Yours
    1, September 8, 2011 at 12:16 pm
    And I too voted for Kerry…and I was in one of the few states that Kerry carried….Does that mean that I am a Democrat on that day….

    When people disagree they actually disagree…when subterfuge is disguised as disagreement, then it is no longer a different of opinion….it is an attack….

    Read my Lips, famous words, I am Independent regardless of the mainstream logic or what may appear illogical to you……..there are many folks on here that are Independent…..Yes…independent…and if they offer an opinion different than yours, you seem to take it as a personal attack…

    As far as Ann Richards…not Anne Richards btw….I suppose familiarity breads contempt… I knew her before she became power stricken……Ronnie Earle is an ass…but he did the right things….Robert aka Bob Bullock was a jackass as well….but not to be confused with the porn star….

    Swarthmore mom
    1, September 8, 2011 at 12:41 pm
    AY I never claimed I was personally attacked and don’t care if I am. Can’t afford to be that thin skinned. I don’t take these discussions that personally but I do take look askance at those that do not consider womens rights when evaluating a candidate.

    Swarthmore mom
    1, September 8, 2011 at 1:13 pm
    AY, That is right. Try to make me a villain because I disagree with you on so many aspects of life. I do look distrustfully at those that do not consider women’s rights when discussing human rights. It has absolutely nothing to do with me personally. It has to do with lack of consideration for women in general. …

    Anonymously Yours
    1, September 8, 2011 at 1:28 pm
    Swarthmore mom
    1, September 8, 2011 at 1:13 pm
    AY, That is right. Try to make me a villain because I disagree with you on so many aspects of life. I do look distrustfully at those that do not consider women’s rights when discussing human rights. It has absolutely nothing to do with me personally. It has to do with lack of consideration for women in general. …

    First, I did not make you out to be a villain….I am unsure what you are saying with the remaining portion of your statement….

    I will state this though, “Lack of consideration” for women, men or children is just plain rude. I did not think you were one to propound in the ideal of of southern chivalry…

    Swarthmore mom
    1, September 8, 2011 at 4:33 pm
    Did not use the word askance to deceive. It was direct.

    Anonymously Yours
    1, September 8, 2011 at 5:41 pm
    No SWM,

    Being dismissive about someone else viewpoint besides your own was your target and you made it personal. Reread what you posted, if you care to differ with what is stated right here, right now.

    Anonymously Yours
    1, September 8, 2011 at 6:01 pm
    correction:

    Being intellectually dishonest are we? You “KNEW” damn well it was personal. Your “YOU’RE as bad as Republicans that say we won’t raise taxes and then turn around and pass a use fee…just figuring a different way to make your point and balance the budget….

    Anonymously Yours
    1, September 8, 2011 at 7:40 pm
    Stating your opinion and attacking me are two separate things…Other people attacking you is beyond my control. If you will note, when your were attacked in an uncivil manner, I did defend the uncivil portion. The rest, your posts speaks for themselves…I can assure you and people who have access can also confirm I did not post under any other names today, not that I have not in the past.

    If you disagree with the professor then say so…Please don’t attack me for the professors view points. I am not a Ron Paul fan, but he does have some good ideals…State your opinion, be original….Don’t attack someone just because they disagree with what you hold near and dear….That sounds too much like a Teabagger…which I do not think you are….Abortion is a state issue…the Feds set the floor and the states sets the ceilings….This is a local issue as far as the Feds are concerned…Now they can limit federal funding for that, which is true…Your beef is with the state you live in..not me…

    Now, I am still waiting for you to explain to me why you said these: 1) Republican; 2) Misogynist and 3) a person viewed with ASKANCE…..this is subterfuged dialogue…just like a troll…

  81. You know, it feels pretty good to stand up for myself…I did not realize how much I was being pushed around by folks since 07’….I guess it time that my Opinion should weigh as equally as anyone else… Don’t you agree?

    Thank you for assisting me in this remarkable achievement…I am not afraid of my shadow right now….

    Again, SWM….No one was making you a target…..One, was only defending his right to his voice his opinion…And if you feel like a target….I am sorry that you had to attack me…..Although you may disagree…it is still my opinion and I like you are entitled to our own respective opinions……..

    And if you can’t handle the truth as expressed in your own words….oh well…at least, I know…

  82. I find it most amusing that you women are the first to call out a male for saying something unkind to a female. When the shoes are reversed and the male is still attacked you stand together in furtherance of this injustice.

    May I inquire as to why you have double standards? Is not the equality you seek for yourself to be shared? Or is it to be, once you obtain the equality you seek the annihilation of the male race?

  83. Swarthmore mom: “I am only a convenient target for both of these guys’ anger.”
    —-

    English is my first language and I have a good grasp of it. I know what words mean and I know what context is. I was present on the thread that started this pissing contest and I re-read the postings of yours that started it. Repeatedly.

    AY has put words in your mouth to take offense at completely out of proportion to what was written. Anon was grossly rude and has come to this thread now stating that the burden of feminism played out in society would cause him to look at males that divorce wives differently (more harshly) than females- brainwashed by societal misandry. As if we were all not endowed with some mechanisms that might moderate social conventions that were basically unfair. Like , I don’t know, intellect?

    Would you like whine with that cheese sir?

    You can add to that his pronouncement that feminism was spawned by a bunch of elitist, ivy tower, out-of-touch-women (as if a hand-full of authors were the driving force behind a nationwide movement that lasted 2+ generations) and I see someone that has in his own mind dismissed the movement and blames its fruit for his own chauvinism. Oh please.

    You, Swarthmore mom., are correct; you are only a convenient target for both of these guys’.

    Which says to me that any female on this blawg is. I suspect that you were the target of most convenience because you make very short postings and their exposure/push-back would be less. Fuck that. I don’t like the tone or manner of the discussion, it’s disingenuous and been taken to crudely sexist levels.

    Frankly AY, I’m surprised at you. At one time, for some forgotten reason, (maybe you were between jobs?) you devoted a lot of time to this blawg and began to write long, well written- I mean WELL written, well analyzed arguments on a number of topics. I was amazed at the skill you brought to bear since you were of the short and humorous/snarky school of posting most often. Then it stopped. I revised my entire view of you as well as my respect level.

    I am amazed that you would alter the words SM used to come up with a nexus for the vitriol you are now showing. Amazed. I suspect and hope something else is going on in your life that spurs this displaced hostility, it would validate my earlier opinion of you- everybody likes validation. :-) I’ve been wrong before though.

    BTW, I’m actually following your request when you said you would go on doing what you do and I should go on with what I do- this is it. I’m calling you guys out for whatever is wrong with you and there is something wrong with you two. I am unhappy that it is infecting perfectly good threads that I might enjoy more if the contagion had not spread.

    You can have whatever opinions you want, you can state them freely, but “at the length truth will out.”

    ++++++AY

    “I look at it like…How dare I defend myself from a vicious statement….Then I get attacked for cross threading….Well certain buzz words pop up then I’ll respond…”

    +++
    There were no buzz words, you were taking cheap shouts via caroms in unrelated postings to other posters, I know it when I see it because I am a past master of the art- I gave it up though (on the advice of my mentor) because it’s cheap- that’s why they’re called “cheap shots”.

    +++++Anon: (speak for themselves)

    “But worse, feminist theory and feminist policies and active feminist misandry are now ensconced in US Law, and in administrative policies in schools, and widely throughout society.

    That’s of course documented by FIRE and by many others.
    ——

    “Where the “public face” of feminism went wrong was in the fact that the people out front were from the leisure or academic classes and so issued their pronouncements from their particular elite perspectives.”

    That’s not the public face. That IS where feminist theories are formed.”
    ——

    “And if you would think equal of the two couples, I apologize, because I think I’ve had so much misandry pumped into me by society, that I think I would think less of the man seeking the divorce than the woman. So that makes you by far the better person.”
    ——

    also, regarding this:
    “I was totally clueless you had a beef with swm. I have just witnessed swm over and over again making misandric statements and no one would call her on it.”

    ***
    That sir, is a lie.

  84. Darwin52, “You women..” Is that like ‘you black people’? Or, ‘you Jews’?

    Got your number pal, try harder. Amateur.

  85. LK,

    And how did I do that…I think her words speak for themselves….I take it you are reading what you want as well, English may be your first language apparently you comprehend what you wish……..I think you have failed to read what was stated….

    How did I mistake being called a: 1) Republican; 2) Misogynist and 3) a person viewed with ASKANCE…..

    So, exactly how did I (AY has) put words in her (your) mouth to take offense at completely out of proportion to what was written.

    Please read what was written….I realize it is a stretch….but do so…

  86. Another thing LK,

    I am still trying to figure out how I became a Republican because I am not in support of Obama….and because I don’t support Obama I am against Choice and because I am against Choice (which I am not) I don’t care about women….and then I am to be viewed with askance….So please…explain this if you can…You have dipped in the defense of SWM …now try to explain that…if you can….

    I’ll repeat…I liked Huntsman…I have stated so….The Professor even stated that he liked Huntsman….read the thread….I got blasted because I supported Huntsman….So I am against Choice because the only one for choice at present is Obama….So I am indifferent to women…..that can be inferred as a misogynist….especially if you take the askance comment in the same breath….

    You get on your bandwagon and beat the snare drum while I have been sounding the bass….I do not expect to be attacked….I was, I defended myself…where were you when I was getting bashed….Was that ok with you? Sounds like different standards for males and females….

    Even when I was defending myself with SWM….she was attacked…I still defended her against the uncivil portion of the attack….You even commented…But did you come to my defense….HELL NO…

    I don’t think you can or will admit that I was attacked….BTW…What you wrote above was so convoluted that I could not follow it without dissecting it…and I really have no intentions of doing that…

  87. You know what LK….I really don’t expect you to do the right thing…If you do, I’ll be surprised….I have learned that most people don’t do the right thing….they do what is most convient….

  88. Lottakatz,

    Darwin52, “You women..” Is that like ‘you black people’? Or, ‘you Jews’?

    Got your number pal, try harder. Amateur.

    **********

    Well done! Score one for the “V” people. Not bad for a…a…a woman.

    ;)

  89. The way I see it LK….If you cherry pick what you wish to address….
    What was said:

    “Darwin52
    1, September 16, 2011 at 2:43 pm
    I find it most amusing that you women are the first to call out a male for saying something unkind to a female. When the shoes are reversed and the male is still attacked you stand together in furtherance of this injustice.

    May I inquire as to why you have double standards? Is not the equality you seek for yourself to be shared? Or is it to be, once you obtain the equality you seek the annihilation of the male race?”

    Does not seem like a denial of the remainder….So you agree that we have double standards…..and so long as it is an injustice to what is perceived as a comment made by a male….

    What of that same comment was in fact made by a female….would you have still said the same thing….Oh…my….you have a quandary now….

  90. Correction:

    You cherry pick what you wish to address….
    *****

    Does not seem like a denial of the remainder….So you agree that we have is in your mind permissible double standards…..and so long as it is an injustice that is directed at a male or what is perceived as a male….then it is ok….Right?

    What if that same comment was made by a female, posting as Darwin….would you have still said the same thing regarding “You Women”….Oh…my….you have a quandary now….

    Do I expect you to address it…Probably not….

  91. Lottakatz: “You women..” Is that like ‘you black people’? Or, ‘you Jews’?

    From “Annie Hall”

    ALVY: I distinctly heard it. He muttered under his breath, “Jew.”

    ROB: You’re crazy!

    ALVY: No, I’m not. We were walking off the tennis court, and you know, he was there and me and his wife, and he looked at her and then they both looked at me, and under his breath he said, “Jew.”

    ROB: Alvy, you’re a total paranoid.

    ALVY: Wh- How am I a paran-? Well, I pick up on those kind o’ things. You know, I was having lunch with some guys from NBC, so I said … uh, “Did you eat yet or what?” and Tom Christie said, “No, didchoo?” Not, did you, didchoo eat? Jew? No, not did you eat, but Jew eat? Jew. You get it? Jew eat?

  92. “Someone referred to me as a feminazi on another thread. That was a first.”

    SwM,

    Any one who uses the term “feminazi” except to deride its utterance by another writer/speaker is not only a moron, but very afraid of women. Now, however, I really doubt it was AY who called you that it doesn’t seem his style. If he did then he does to be described as in sentence one. I do think you’re mixing up AY with Anon though, because I think that there is a clear thread in Anon’s writing that does bespeak opposition to the fight for women’s full equality. AY can go over the top at times to be sure, but I don’t see him as anti-women. I also don’t see him as a Republican and I certainly don’t see him as being anti-choice. There are many here who don’t support Obama, like Gene, FFLEO and Jill. I respect their beliefs and am likewise angered by this Administration, yet I will nevertheless vote for him as I’ve stated many times.

    AY,

    I think you also have gone a little too far in your interpretation of SwM’s comments. I don’t read her statements towards you as being so far out of line as to take umbrage. SwM is expressing her point of view strongly and you seem too have reacted with more “touchiness” than is called for
    from the remarks. My sense is that you have read far too much into them and in so doing have felt quite put upon. I don’t think you consciously altered her words, but I do think that in your mind you distorted their meaning beyond that which was meant.

    To Everyone,

    I write the above not to stifle this argument or to take sides, because I truly believe that at least between AY and SwM there is more smoke than fire. To me there has been over exaggeration on both sides that has escalated with each passing comment as the tempers of both these outspoken people have further flared. As far as I’m concerned they can both have at each other to their hearts content, not for the least of reasons that I’ve in the past have had my own verbal feuds here.

    Unfortunately though, Anon has challenged me to give my opinion and in my own macho way I will always rise to a challenge. I think the real targets of opprobrium here are those who seem to think that Robertson’s remarks were benign and that if it were a woman rather than a man asking the question, his answer would have not been controversial. Anon has gone out the the way to reference this as both an issue of feminist and progressive tunnel vision and I think his case is a poor one.

    To my mind even the term “feminist” has pejorative connotations. The battle is nothing less than a battle for equality in all aspects of life and it is a struggle against the bounds being put on women by government, societal mores and religion. The struggle didn’t begin with Friedan, Greer and Steinem although gave it a new impetus in the late 60’s. This is an age old struggle of humanity and while some might think me a “traitor to my sex”, whatever the hell that would mean, I stand with the underdog as usual. To be clear, because some whining males think their sex the underdog, I stand with women.

    Now please go back to your bickering as I cook dinner.

  93. Mike S.,

    Thank you…While I think she stated what I read…..There was also the phone text and email exchanges between the two of us….How I got being called a Republican….and I even said that I’d probably vote against the other guy…hence casting a vote for Obama…I as well as a number of other folks are unhappy with the way Obama has operated while in office….

    How I got the misogynist part was based upon everything said and the words used…then askance was directed in the same breath……

    I did not start it…and I see no reason to back down…when I heard and read what I read….

    I would be doing this regardless if it was SWM or someone else…The statements were uncalled for….and I asked for an apology….I got nothing….other than derision from 2 women folk +SWM on here for expressing my opinion….

    Apparently, it is fine for women folk to attack a male….but to defend oneself….is not permissible if you happen to be male….I see no reason for the double standard….Just like on the Firefighter Thread today….I did not want to comment because I feared reprisal of being called a racist….that as well would send me over the edge….

    With respect to Anon…I called him out when it was not civil… I think I have tried to maintain a certain degree of civility….not that it has been returned….

  94. There has been no email discussion of anything since Sept. 1. The Huntsman thread was well after that.There have been no texts since August when I was texted about El Paso County.

  95. TexasSage1, September 16, 2011 at 12:27 pm

    That said, I think in this case he is right. Divorce does not necessarily mean abandonment.
    ————————————-
    As a nurse I have luckily never run into the kind of creep that would divorce his wife due to illness in order to pursue another woman. From what I’ve seen, that is rare. I HAVE seen couples married for 40+ years talking about divorcing in order to protect the families assets and prevent loss of a house or to be able to get some kind of help with the astronomical medical bills. The stress of economic hardship to people in the throes of medical catastophe is immense and uncivilized and inhuman. I have also been blessed to see people who were married and extremely committed to spouses suffering from severe Alzheimers who valued and were faithful to thier marriages. Real Alzheimers is ugly indeed, it does not surprise me that someone would run away from it….it does surprise me that someone would dump a long time spouse who was sufferring from it (or anything else…) as an excuse to run towards something else….

  96. That is absolutely correct SWM….and in those Texts and Emails….was basically asking you if I had offended you in someway to deserve the attacks….The last text 8/29 was one couched in the term regarding the El Paso Thread….The last Email was about September 1…. I basically said then….That I was tired of your attacks….and that if that was the way you wanted to play…then I would respond in kind….You are correct….The Huntsman thread was September 8….

    You have yet to apologize…..

  97. Mike,

    Here’s what I see.

    Mespo’s homophobic bigoted joke was completely out of context for the thread it was in.

    Apparently, I am the only person on this board that thinks his joke was offensive, homophobic, and worse crime, in my mind, is that his “he’s a big fat faggot”, was not even remotely funny.

    You break your arm patting yourself on the back about what a great guy you are, what a mensch, all your charity and good deeds and activism in RL.

    But you bend over backwards defending an attack on Marcus Bachman that other actual liberals already deride:

    Now you could take the high road and not defend it, but you don’t you jump in with your massive mensch like arms and actually defend liberals making homophobic attacks on others. And worse, you state the canonical liberal defense for it. “We are ironic. We can’t be homophobes or bigots. It’s the conservatives that are homophobes and bigots.”

    In the meantime, yeah, anyone who spends three hours a day at this site should be able to notice swm’s misandry and comment on it now and again. As I’ve apologized to Elaine M., though, let me extend that to you. I apologize to you Mike for oppressing you with my soft bigotry of moderate expectations.

    Mensch, heal thyself.

  98. Woosty,

    “As a nurse I have luckily never run into the kind of creep that would divorce his wife due to illness in order to pursue another woman. From what I’ve seen, that is rare.”

    You are luckier than I. As I said, I have a close relative who used to be a hero, do that. And as I pointed out, Michael Schiavo wanted to do this, but stayed married as that was his only control point over Terri Schiavo’s relatives.

    And of course we all know of that scumbag Newt.

    I suspect there are many cases of men and women that have done this.

    And as I agreed with Lottakatz, I would (have) want(ed) my wife to do this, and well, who knows what my wife would have wanted from me. (Probably to drop dead.)

    My own suspicion is that, most people think that if they were in Terri Schiavo’s state they would want not want abandonment but they would want their spouse to move on.

    So to me the interesting question is what is the difference between a vegetative state and a state of severe advanced Alzheimer’s.

    And of course the elephant in the room Woosty, is that even though you haven’t found a creep that would leave *his wife*, you and I both know that women initiate the vast majority (70%) of all divorces. And apparently we are all good with that.

    Personally, I think it’s really creepy that society thinks this sort of ratio is okay. I suspect it says a lot about the pathology of women.

    So men don’t move to divorce their wife, until she is brain dead, and that appears to be a problem.

    Women are encouraged to divorce their husband if he bores them or is otherwise below their standards. But once the husband is severely ill, it is true that women will stay by their sides more often than the men will. And we think that all of this should be the norm.

    The statistics are about 7:1. So for every seven creepy assholes like Newt Gingrich, there is at least one cold hearted bitch out there.

    And as others have pointed out, and you agreed, in Schiavo’s case, and in many cases, and probably even in this case, divorce of a partner in this state is not necessarily or even likely abandonment.

  99. “If you are the only person seeing a problem, then maybe you’re the problem.”

    Well, there are lots of progressives that have called out other progressives for their gay bashing attacks on Marcus Bachmann. That I am aware of this and you are not perhaps speaks more to your own ignorance and insensitivity than it does to my being the problem.

    More generally, perhaps you are too cowardly and brainwashed to note swm’s constant stream of bigotry. And it takes a relative outsider to note the King has no clothes.

    You’ve now been given ample evidence of Mespo’s comments and swm’s oeuvre, perhaps you’ll be more aware and able to point them out in the future.

  100. Gene,

    That’s one of those answers that will most certainly bite one in the ass sooner than later…. You’ve been known to have had your tangents….just saying….

  101. It is most interesting that the guest bloggers place their own spin on things… Remember those words when blogging or posting ….

  102. Anonymously Yours
    1, September 16, 2011 at 4:54 pm
    Correction:

    You cherry pick what you wish to address….
    *****

    What if that same comment was made by a female, posting as Darwin….would you have still said the same thing regarding “You Women”….Oh…my….you have a quandary now….

    ————-

    LOL, you don’t know me at all after all this time, you bet your ass I would the context being the same.

    Regarding your charge that I didn’t defend you: The statement by SM as a rhetorical question about the women Justices was answered well (by you) and was inoffensive. It was appropriate in manner and degree of acrimony over a mis-characterization.

    It’s when you went all nuclear and started cross posting that pissed me off, you became an aggressor over an issue that was minor in comparison to the original disagreement. Your aggression in demanding an apology and rehashing the matter became an aggression on my enjoyment of the blawg. You needed to move on, I don’t mind a tantrum now and then but when they go on for days, then it falls, as offensive, entirely on the person throwing the tantrum. The conflation was yours.

    Similarly, this statement is a conflation to hyperbole about my statement to Darwin:

    “May I inquire as to why you have double standards? Is not the equality you seek for yourself to be shared? Or is it to be, once you obtain the equality you seek the annihilation of the male race?”

    Srsly? :-) And you ask why I jump YOUR shit? LoL

    That she looks askance at people that fail to take some things into considerations is not a big deal- I do also and explained that in another posting. I have a lot of ‘single issues’ on my social agenda and don’t do trade offs for economic gains. The economy as a lever for altering artificially manifest corollary issues is too easy to manipulate. (The banks screwed us all, defence is eating all our money, that means that we need to kill Planned Parenthood …and Social Security.)

    Generally I will not trust the judgement of people that trade off social issues for financial issues. That tells me that if the money is right s/he will sell anyone out, out of ignorance if nothing else. You’re ire at that statement does not compute, as you have put it.

  103. Elaine, Thank you.

    Bob Esq., Some folks are too paranoid, some folks aren’t paranoid enough and it ain’t paranoia at all if they’re really out to get you. :-)

    Thanks for the Annie Hall reference, it’s one of my favorite movies, a classic.

  104. LK,

    Now would you please explain what you just said….I may have gotten this wrong..

    I think you said…You’d jump the shit of anyone that crossed the line…Ok..Now why didn’t you then?

    Because you cherry pick….You’ve decided I am wrong…You can say its thread crossing or what ever…Say it enough and it will make you feel better….but its still not my perception…

    I have said long enough that I am a conservative Texas Democrat…see other threads for the Definitions….

    Suffice it to say….The ill will from SWM boils down to, I made an accurate statement about Ann Richards she did not like and she slammed me on that thread….I asked her off line not to do that (attack me) she continued…This may not seem like much to you…but I generally have respect for folks until I have not the reason to…I hope we understand…that I can disagree with someone and still like them and be civil….I think you can….

    The way I see it…you don’t know the whole story, but chose to get involved anyways….and decided that I abridged some unwritten rule….So what its not on topic…how many other threads are no longer on topic…hence, the cherry picking…

  105. Anon: “And of course the elephant in the room Woosty, is that even though you haven’t found a creep that would leave *his wife*, you and I both know that women initiate the vast majority (70%) of all divorces. And apparently we are all good with that.

    Personally, I think it’s really creepy that society thinks this sort of ratio is okay. I suspect it says a lot about the pathology of women.”
    ————

    Man, you really don’t seem to have a clue. Here’s how it works and I’m assuming you’re too young to have given it much thought or research.

    I refer you to Woosty’s statement: : I HAVE seen couples married for 40+ years talking about divorcing in order to protect the families assets and prevent loss of a house or to be able to get some kind of help with the astronomical medical bills. The stress of economic hardship to people in the throes of medical catastrophe is immense and uncivilized and inhuman.”

    Men get sick earlier because they don’t live as long and have traditionally performed more toxic work. Divorce early on in the process of institutionalization of a spouse is often the only way to maintain a decent standard of living for both or even one. Eventually, it comes down to one. Unless you are wealthy, die before your money runs out, or stay real healthy until you die, you, like almost everyone will end up in a ‘nursing home’. Yo’ll be living on what Medicaid provides and your spouse will end up with whatever your state determines is appropriate to prevent spousal impoverishment- after she spends all of the savings (maybe/probably has to sell the house- sorry kids) and is reduced to virtually no liquid assets. Divorce can moderate what happens to the two of you. If you plan ahead you won’t be stuck in the (illegal, but present) Medicaid ward of a ‘nice’ nursing home, for a while anyway.

    That’s why I said I hoped PR was considering economic issues with his advice; divorce is, as Woosty correctly observed, not necessarily abandonment. I still won’t trust his motives until he clarifies though.

  106. AY, “The way I see it…you don’t know the whole story, but chose to get involved anyways….”

    I know what I read and if there’s more- off blawg, which you imply there is but SM says is not the case, THEN KEEP IT OFF BLAWG. You start putting bits of it on the blawg then you invite comment. Don’t give me some yada,yada because I don’t want to be burdened by a public snit you were haunting every thread with.

    That it. I’m off this thread.

  107. I double checked and there have been no off blog emails since Sept.1. Thanks LK. Like I said I am grieving my dog of fifteen years, and I don’t need this. I hope it ends here now. I don’t want to be part of any blog wars, and there is no other communication going on.

  108. There you go LK…..

    Cherry Picking…You only read what you wanted to….I even said the last email was September 1 and text August 29 or so….Regarding attacking me….
    *******
    You said: I know what I read and if there’s more- off blawg, which you imply there is but SM says is not the case, THEN KEEP IT OFF BLAWG. You start putting bits of it on the blawg then you invite comment. Don’t give me some yada,yada because I don’t want to be burdened by a public snit you were haunting every thread with.

    That it. I’m off this thread.
    *******

    She said: Swarthmore mom
    1, September 16, 2011 at 6:15 pm
    There has been no email discussion of anything since Sept. 1. The Huntsman thread was well after that.There have been no texts since August when I was texted about El Paso County.

    **********************

    Wouldn’t that say…something to you…or have you picked all of the cherry’s….and you can’t read or comprehend. That yes…I even said the Huntsman thread was after that….

    What would be best if you did not comment…or take sides without reading the whole thing….Seems to make sense to me….But what do I know….

    All’s it would have taken when I said something initially was an apology….Do you have a problem apologizing when you may be wrong……..But if you Cherry Pick you can’t be wring right?

  109. Yes, Thanks LK….for Cherry Picking on this….Still can’t see where someone else may be wrong….Makes the rest of your posts more credible…..

  110. That’s all that ever had to be said. You chose not to admit you made those statements, they speak for themselves….Now, I know what I am dealing with. I bid you well as I’ll have nothing else to do with you baruch sheptaranu…

  111. Published today at Salon:

    http://www.salon.com/entertainment/col/2011/09/16/ask_wayne/index.html

    Dear Wayne,

    My husband of eight months now prefers masturbation, with or without porn, to having sex with me. He had a stroke four months ago and claims that he is afraid if we have sex that he will have another stroke.

    It is humiliating to have him prefer his hand to me and deny that he is masturbating when I walk in the room as he is climaxing. Then he gets up — still denying the act! — and drips ejaculate across the carpet.

    What can I do? I am a healthy, willing and able female and did not get married to continue auto-eroticism as my sole sexual outlet.

    Notice how caring this woman is. Guess what she is told? Woosty? Want to guess?

    Some commenters think this is Salon’s idea of a joke, as it is published in “entertainment” and the author wrote a book called “Humiliation”. If it is a joke though, it’s a pretty sick and misandric joke.

  112. I don’t know what Salon said but I wonder why she didn’t offer to join him instead of feeling all sorry for herself….a little communication goes a long way… ;)

    and auto-eroticism is …well..pretty damn erotic!

  113. SWM,

    There goes that evil malignant side of your last two posts. You know that the first one is a dig to set me off and the second was a threat. Play it any way you want. I have wished you well and adieu. It is what it is. No more digs, please?

  114. Pat Robertson’s comments on any issue are generally mindless, useless, pointless or all three. He is not one to consult on any serious issues.

    Alzheimer’s is only one of many illnesses that put strains on marriage relationships and family finances that few other than those who experience them can appreciate. I am almost 9 years older than my spouse. Should I eventually succumb to dementia or some other debilitating condition, I would want my wife to be able to enjoy the companionship and emotional support that one can only get through a relationship with another adult. I would certainly not expect her to live out my last days in a state of guilt and emotional exhaustion. This is a topic that couples should thoroughly discuss early on

  115. I would want my wife to be able to enjoy the companionship and emotional support that one can only get through a relationship with another adult.~Mike A.
    ————————————
    yes, and I would even say that whether or not there was a divorce involved in that scenario would be necessitated by multiple factors …not just societal norms. As far as the guilt and exhaustion…and moving on go…often easier said than done, especially if there is a living spouse no matter what thier condition if it was a successfull marriage…

  116. Woosty, I agree with you on the “easier said than done” part. But I think it important that spouses give each other permission, as it were, to continue living.

  117. Feminists believe that women should have rights equal to men. That’s it … feminists do not want more rights than men, we simply want rights equal to men. Very slowly but very surely we are achieving that goal.

    However, there is one huge area where I believe men have been systematically cheated of their rights and that concerns their children when divorce is being sought. For some ridiculous reason the courts seem to think that a child needs his/her mother more than his/her father. Claptrap! Children need their fathers and fathers need to be with their children as much as mothers do. Courts are wrong to subject fathers and their children to such heartless custody rulings. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

  118. I don’t mean to be insensitive to the seriousness of Alzheimer’s but … this thread has rambled all over the place … seems apt

  119. Blouise, I agree with you. Men should have equal rights and responsibilities to their children, I think too often when the mother has most of the custody and child support from the ex the father starts to resent the mother for the inequality and this resentment is always felt by the children. Being a good parent is a reward in itself,

    Mark I agree with you also. Pat Robertson is a useless #$#%*&^%(*&^. But he is listened to by his followers as speaking with authority from God. The action of leaving a sick wife should not be supported by a Christian minister speaking with that authority I can see him using his personal feelings as the basis for his comment and I understand the desire to have companionship. But this was said not as his personal feelings but as an answer to a fellow Christian speaking from the pulpit as his whole show is his pulpit. Be ashamed Pat.

  120. Mike, Sorry for putting my own feelings of Robertson as if they were yours. You said “Pat Robertson’s comments on any issue are generally mindless, useless, pointless or all three. He is not one to consult on any serious issues.” I said he was a useless #$#%*&^%(*&^. I did not mean to imply that you thought he was useless . And I do agree that it is a difficult decision to make if you are faced with it. I don’t think badly of anyone for making that decision. Alzheimers is a disease that destroys more lives than just the one of the person afflicted.

  121. “Published today at Salon”

    Anon,

    Sorry to say but that entire comment of yours and the link was a non sequitor, adding nothing to the thread. What does that prove about progressives in general? How does it bolster the position you’ve staked out. I read it and I don’t get its relevance?

  122. “You break your arm patting yourself on the back about what a great guy you are, what a mensch, all your charity and good deeds and activism in RL.

    But you bend over backwards defending an attack on Marcus Bachman that other actual liberals already deride:

    Now you could take the high road and not defend it, but you don’t you jump in with your massive mensch like arms and actually defend liberals making homophobic attacks on others. And worse, you state the canonical liberal defense for it. “We are ironic. We can’t be homophobes or bigots. It’s the conservatives that are homophobes and bigots.”

    Anon,

    1. A little Yiddish context. Mensch is a term used by others, never by oneself and that is by definition. The term is a judgment of someone by other parties, never self-appellated. I’ve never called myself a mensch.

    2. I’ve done very good deeds and have been an activist that is true. I’ve never been into charity since I’ve never had the extra money and also having worked closely with the non-profit field I’m suspicious of most of them. To further your imprecations one would think incorrectly that I see myself as an altruist and that too would be incorrect. I don’t believe in altruism. All the good works that I may have done were because doing them made me feel good. I am far from, nor would I want to be a “selfless” person.

    3. Mespo did not make a homophobic attack, so I wasn’t defending one.

    4. As for the “canonical liberal defense” that is again your ascribing to me that which I am not. I’m neither progressive, nor liberal, but merely an iconoclast.

    Perhaps if you did some introspection you might take some self awareness from the following:

  123. Blouise,

    You are correct that children need both parents….At the turn of the century…when parties got divorced….the children stayed with the father to work the family farm….then…advance 20 years…white women got the right to vote…advance 20 more….WWII broke out…men were at war…women stayed home or worked in war production factories and…worked the farms….when most of the males were at war unless an exception….advance 20 more years…family farms decreased greater than 50%…men were working….the women were staying home….it was logical…that the children stayed with the primary care giver….advance 20 more years…we are in the 80’s women are working just the same as men…some courts are dividing children like property…These Judges were the ones were taken care of by their moms….so it only seemed natural…..advance 20 more years…the men are starting to get shared custody…it has taken a hundred or so years….but it evolves….

    Or least that is my take on it…

  124. “Personally, I think it’s really creepy that society thinks this sort of ratio is okay. I suspect it says a lot about the pathology of women.”

    Or it says a lot about how immature, inattentive and/or abusive many men can be. Most men I know consider Sunday “Football Sacrosanct” even if their wife and family would rather not share it. Also going out “with the guys” is another great justification for men to flee wife, family, hearth and home. After awhile of this self-involved distraction from actually maintaining a married or family life I imagine many women wonder if their role in their husband’s life is to provide cooking, cleaning and sex.

  125. “Courts are wrong to subject fathers and their children to such heartless custody rulings. Wrong, wrong, wrong.”

    Blouise,

    Quite true, but think about it for a second. Aren’t rulings like that based on the assumption that the woman’s role is always to be caregiver, which in itself is sexist.

  126. Mike,

    That may be sexist in of its own…But you gotta remember that it is Judges making the decisions that were raised by women….

  127. Is it a mistake to confuse ‘relationship’ with ‘marriage’?

    Marriage is a legal ‘contract’. Relationship is a sacred garden sown between 2 or more individuals. When has the superimposed ‘court system’ ever gotten it right? Courts are where you go when things go wrong or society says you must, marriages are contracts that are upheld or reneged on…. Relationships, and I am referring to those chosen consciously, as opposed to societally imposed, are based on consent so it boils down to…. do you keep your promises and when is it ok to break a contract?

  128. AY,

    “That may be sexist in of its own…But you gotta remember that it is Judges making the decisions that were raised by women….”

    You mean the judges weren’t also raised by their fathers who are men?

  129. Elaine,

    Generally not….They were either working at GM, Ford Chrysler or some other over timed job….It was rare then…to have an active father in the children’s lives….

    I do understand what you are saying….But a lot of these folks worked extra overtime to pay for colleges…. It is interesting that you say that….

    I had two clients that worked at GM…one lived in a trailer park…in a place that cost him about 40K….another lived in a house in a nice part of town that had a value of about 225….or 250…. I represented both of them in divorces….they both made about 75 a year and the wives did not work (out side the house)….

    Now who would you favor in a divorce as the primary care giver?

  130. Anonymously Yours1, September 17, 2011 at 12:05 pm
    —————————————————
    division of labour in a marriage cannot be looked at so easily. For 1 thing, women are not treated equally in the marketplace when it comes to wages and employment and they are not treated equally for thier labours at home. And yet there is not a single soul in this world who does not owe thier entire life to her.

    Now who would you favor in a divorce as the primary care giver?

    Now who would you favor in a divorce as the primary giver?

    mmmm….

    Now who would you favor in a divorce as the primary provider?

    For what purpose then, was the marriage begun?….and did you meet your goals?….so who wants out before the contract ends???? and why????

  131. Anonymously Yours1, September 17, 2011 at 11:20 am

    Mike,

    That may be sexist in of its own…But you gotta remember that it is Judges making the decisions that were raised by women….
    ——————————————————————-
    your first immediate response in your thoughts is that all Judges are men????

  132. Mike,

    “Quite true, but think about it for a second. Aren’t rulings like that based on the assumption that the woman’s role is always to be caregiver, which in itself is sexist.”

    True but that, in my opinion, is no excuse. I have seen far too many women use the Courts to beat up their ex-husbands by denying the actual shared custody they’ve been granted through a tactic called “custodial care” … in other words, the parent who resides in the school system area.

    Typical maneuver: “Yeah, you were supposed to have him all week but he needs to catch the school bus and he can’t do that from your house and I can’t be sure you’ll drive him to school on time. It’s not in his best interest to spend two weeks a month with you during the school year. Right Mr. Judge?” … “Yes, the mother is right. So ordered!”

    Father now goes from two 7-day weeks a month to two weekends a month … shared custody, my eyebrow. Then the school system will only notify the custodial parent of things like “student conferences” which means the father, who is just as interested and concerned about his child’s progress in school, has to find a way to get the info as to day and time the conference is scheduled without bugging the teacher too much for fear she/he might become irritated with him.

    In this culture men can’t stand in the courtroom and cry when they hear the Judge’s ruling but let’s not kid ourselves … their hearts are breaking.

    I’ve mentioned before that due to my age and diminished energy levels, I pick my battles/causes carefully. This is one battle I chose to fight.

  133. As to the sex of Judges … I have found that to be immaterial. Certain counties in my state are known to be pro-mother and the sex of the Judge makes no difference in the ruling. I don’t know who sets the “policy” but it is set in stone.

  134. AY,

    My mother worked too. She re-entered the workforce when I started second grade. She got home later than my father because she had a long bus ride to the company where she worked in another city.

    As for my husband–his mother also worked. His father was very involved in raising him and his younger brothers, in spending time with his children, and in cooking for the family.

  135. No wootsys….

    It is not….Most of the die hard judges that follow the previous courts rulings are male…I would say that less that 10% of all the Judges are female in the Midwest….

  136. Elaine M.,

    Not to split hairs…But some parents just do not care to be involved….Sometimes its mothers but most of the time it is fathers….It may be a regional thing… societal or pure bad upbringing….

    As Blouise pointed out above…The Policy is some areas is set in stone….The statue stated that the Judge must consider Joint Shared Custody if requested…I had a male judge say…on the record….Ok, I have considered it…denied..the time frame was less than 5 seconds…He was upheld on appeal….No JOINT SHARED CUSTODY….Mother Primary Custody…

  137. I have also found that divorce lawyers who represent men in these courtrooms know their clients are going to get the shaft and advise them early on as to the battle they are facing. Basically these lawyers work to protect their clients from getting too much of the shaft. The fathers, stuck between a rock and a hard place, figure it will be different for them … it never is.

    Trying to get to the bottom of this mess is a major battle …

Comments are closed.