Home Recommended Products Contact Us
Resources & Links
Fatherlessness Statistics
Child Support
Legal Resources
Search This Site
Bad Judges List
Free Templates
Restraining Orders
Judicial Abuse Stories
Father's Stories
Legal Help & Referrals
Constitutional Rights
Table of Contents
Terms & Conditions
Signup for Newsletter
Search Site
Language Used for Propaganda

John Flaherty of Liberty Bell Union brings up a great point about this language stuff, which everyone should know:

Like in the George Orwell novel 1984 the enemy/state/feminists essentially change the definition of the language as a powerful tool to brainwash people. We need to be aware of these terms and resist using them, or get or definitions out there.
Currently these terms are all being redefined or created for feminist propaganda:
ABUSE - Now equals anything a woman does not like, as listed in "domestic violence" brochures. Amazingly abuse is defined to include: "Use of Logic", "dirty looks", "pointing gestures" and lots of other perfectly legal, and even appropriate things men do to express themselves. They basically want to define how we act by what a woman wants (which we know is always steady) .  There are even laughable double standards built right in theses mass printed brochures like "Men can not expect/demand sex from a woman" AND "Denying women sex is abuse". Spreading rumors about them or threatening to do that is also abuse.  Who do you think dos this more woman or men?  Come on who writes this stuff are how are they getting funding??  Well of course they are taking the worst case stories and making it seem like this is the case with all. 
Child Support should be 1/2 the actual cost of raising a child AND going to the benefit of that child.
Child extortion is what we really are forced to pay under threat of jail, which seems to average about 5X this actual number
Deadbeat Dad - Well you know this one. This is anyone who can't keep up with the unfair payments that have 4 major layers of advantages built into the system for women as follows:

1. excessive amount of payments,
2. we pay the taxes on this income,
3. tax benefits for head of household,
4. The woman's first $20,000 income does not count to reduce the man's payments at all (and even after that not by much).

The total results are startling and actually allow a woman making $20,000 to live much better than a man making $70,000 per year!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  IT IS OUTRAGEOUS and UNBELIEVABLE!

Visitor or Visitation - To label a dad as a "non-parent". Be careful what you say!