LETTER TO THE POST - THE RIGHT TO NOT SUPPORT

THE RIGHT TO NOT SUPPORT

Mr. Gunter's editorial critiquing the Ontario Superior Court judgment in the Pasqualino Cornelio case ordering him to continue paying child support to his ex-wife for twin girls fathered by someone else without Mr. Cornelio's knowledge makes the right argument, but too timidly. Mr. Gunter also avoids the major under-currents of Canadian society of which family law is but one part....it is not just in the arena of family law that 'logic is distorted'. And the problem goes far beyond 'distorted logic' to a almost inexorable bias against men in many aspects of society where 'logic' fairness and justice have been aborted to appease extreme male-hating feminist ideology.

Mr. Gunter avoids this 'dangerous' subject to make his article politically palatable. This is understandable, although he does refer to the 'hue and cry' that would occur if a woman were 'press-ganged' by a judge to pay a father child support for children out of wedlock....

Mr. Gunter for example, dilutes his argument by ending his article by saying a man who did not support children fathered by another, would be a 'heel'. But he does not say what a woman who commits adultery and has kids out of wedlock, in flagrant deceit of marital vows, would be.........surely even prostitutes behave more morally, and contractually?

The problem in our post-feminist society is that 'the woman is always right'. Women are never guilty of misconduct – if they 'maliciously' wound their husbands, it is because they are suffering from 'battered woman's syndrome'; if they manufacture allegations of sexual abuse against their ex-husbands to have custody denied to them, that is of no consequence; if they manufacture allegations of rape or sexual harassment, that is simply 'mischief'; if a wife is sleeping with someone else, surely that is the husband's failure to keep her happy and satisfied.........men are only 'deadbeats', wallets...moneybags, who have no moral qualities as they only want 'one thing'.... they are therefore to be presumed guilty as charged, no evidence necessary. The heinous and automatic guilt of men necessitates draconian laws and medieval policies such as 'zero tolerance'.

There are never any consequences for female students who destroy the careers of male teachers with false allegations......in domestic disputes, it is always the man who must be charged with a crime, never the woman.....in a rape case, a woman's previous sexual history cannot now be discussed......no is always no to our idiot system, even though any fool knows that no is usually only a woman's first position, to immediately gain and maintain the upper hand in sexual negotiations, and be changed as the situation dictates, for women must not appear 'easy', or forward.....Women are always the prey, never the pursuers...they never lust, only love...they never use their 'pussy-power' to extract, even extort, the maximum price (emotional and financial) from men....no..they are too kind and loving for that.....The tommyrot just does not end.....but in the Land of the Eunuch, the Home of the John Bobbitt, tommyrot is official policy.

These matters constitute more than 'distorted logic' – they amount to systematic (and quite hideous) corruption by a system that has sold out men to feminist ideology, and idiotology. Some decades ago, an early feminist wrote of the 'female eunuch'......we are long now into an era where male eunuchs and John Bobbitts abound.