“Name and shame” those who don’t/can’t pay for women’s bastards


10 December 2006

Website to ‘shame’ absent parents

Ministers are planning to publish the names of absent parents who refuse to pay maintenance for their children.

Or, to put it another way;

Women-firster manginas in charge of the Matriarchy are going to illegally publish the names of non-custodial fathers who have escaped the Matriarchy’s enforcement agency, the CSA, in the hope of shaming them into paying up for kids they never see.

I hate the way society declares that “non-custodial parents” (i.e. fathers) should pay to support “their” children.

Britain is now a Matriarchy. Children belong to their mothers and no-one else according to the law. In the UK, women can have unborn children chopped up and dumped in a bin if she can’t be bothered to raise him/her, and in divorces, the mother invariably gets custody.

In Britain, “society” now means women and “their” children.

So why should men be made to support women’s kids?

Furthermore, single mothers who whelp kids out of wedlock deserve to be laughed at when they come crawling and squealing with angry demands that their bastard’s “father” should pay Child Support.

A child who is borne to a single mother does not have a father; hence, the father does not have a child. So it is impossible for single mothers to claim that their bastard’s “father” should have to support the child, because the child, being borne out of wedlock, is fatherless. Therefore the single mother is alone responsible for her bastard whore-child.

Ministers are set to announce proposals this week which are expected to include removing passports from absent parents who do not pay up and imposing curfews and electronic tagging.

Ministers are also set to be the first against the wall when the Matriarchy falls.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 6:43 AM

At 7:12 AM, Rob Fedders said…

You nailed it, Duncan.

I read one of Angry Harry’s articles that described that since women have the choice AFTER conception to decide whether it is a baby or a useless piece of tissue to be dumped and flushed… therefore… WOMEN HAVE ALL THE CHOICE AND EVERY PREGNANCY IS CHOSEN BY HER!!!

Every One!

And that men have to be forced to pay FOR HER CHOICE, to decide whether she has a baby or whether she has a useless piece of tissue – IS INSANE!

Who cares about morals or religion here, we are talking about the letter of the law THAT FORCES men to pay for a woman who chooses AFTER conception whether she is really pregnant or not!

She is not FORCED into motherhood, the way it was 60 years ago… SHE CHOOSES – FOR HER AND THE MAN! And the man deals with consequences of her choice either way!


This must be changed toute suite!

Have your bastard child if you want, tattoo whore, but then support the baby 100% too! It is 100% YOUR body and YOUR choice, isn’t it?

Then it is 100% YOUR responsibility!

Fuck off, ladies!

The Turks and Caicos Islands with their protective banking laws are calling me… what’s that, waves crashing on the shores… come to me… come to me…

I’m a comin’


At 9:05 AM, Anonymous said…

Ministers are planning to publish the names of absent parents who refuse to pay maintenance for their children.

I think publishing the names of custodial parents who deny visitation to non-custodial parents is in order then.

But that will never happen.

Pussy powaah at work.


At 10:09 AM, Field Marshall Watkins said…

Man f*ck that. The feminist double standards make me sick. Typical sh*t. Try and force men to pay for their brats. Oh but wait, I thought women were all independent and self sufficient, they don’t need a man!

What a load of crap. Like single mothers don’t get enough advantages like council housing, benefits and the like. Men don’t get a damn thing.

Last night actually in one of my dreams I’d gotten a girl pregnant. Thank f*ck it was a dream! Phew, close one.


At 11:27 AM, unpleasant bitter git said…

I wonder if the government has any plans to ‘name and shame’ the women who abuse the system by becoming ‘single’ mothers so they can grab a council house with benefits at the taxpayers expense while the boyfriend/father lurks in the background waiting to move in on the sly?

On a side note, I was the anonymous first commenter on this thread befuddled as to who to vote for.

Because of immigration and all this PC correct BS being imported from Brussels I thought that splitting from the EU would be good thing. So I went to the UK Independance Party website to check out what they were offering. Now, I’d always written them off because they get portrayed by the mainstream media as being a one policy party but they’re not as I discovered. They are now the only party to represent true conservative values of civil liberties, minimal government interference and they support the concept of the flat tax rate. Enabling the flat tax concept would clear out a huge number of bureaucratic government departments saving taxpayers a fortune as well as making the UK’s workforce competitive and more likely to work for what they want instead of trying to defraud the benefits system left right and centre.

Really, I cant see any MRA living in the UK not choosing UKIP as being the closest to helping our aims once they’ve read their policies.

I also came across a blogger worth checking out who now supports the UKIP called Devils Kitchen who seems to be to politics what Duncan is to Mens Rights.


At 11:59 AM, Anonymous said…

If you do not have custody you have no children. There is no obligation to pay child support if you have no custody.
There are just laws which try to force oppression upon men.


At 2:41 PM, patriarchal-phoenix said…

You know, a part of me, my darker, cynical-side, at times actually finds this whole Great-Britain-going-insane-thing quite interesting and entertaining!!

Seriously, how often do you see the World’s #1 Super-Power lose all their power and prestige within a century, and then go the extra-mile and allow their entire society go completely bonkers-insane! If nothing else, this will be one for the history books!

Rome fell as well, but what remained of that empire didn’t do anything close to what Great Britain is doing now!

Today, what was once the people who left their little island, and conquered the planet, are now the laughing-stock of Humanity! Sorry, but that’s just one Yankee from across the pond’s opinion…


At 2:42 PM, mfsob said…

And we all LAUGHED when the movie 1984 came out …


At 4:36 PM, Paul Parmenter said…

Yes, here we go again. This useless Government has another stick to beat men with.

But don’t despair. I have little doubt that the serial incompetents to whom they hand that stick will promptly drop it and trip over their own shoelaces trying to pick it up again.

Look how hopeless the CSA have been. They have taken inefficiency and bungling to new levels. I fully expect them, or whichever new agency the Government sets up to unleash its latest attack on absent fathers, to fail as miserably as before.

Just consider the sort of people who would work in such an organisation. Anyone with a shred of decency or common sense would steer clear of it. The CSA clearly only attracts deadbeats who don’t care about men or children, who can’t be bothered to do their loathsome jobs properly, and are only interested in collecting their paychecks at the end of the month.

So stand by either for a mass of illegal action taken against the wrong men, who will promptly start suing the Government left right and centre and unleash merry hell; or for the tough talk to evaporate and the daft idea to be quietly dropped.


At 6:14 PM, VoodooJock said…

Hey, the birth rate in England’s already in free-fall, so the obvious governmental solution is to accelerate it by further reducing the incentives for men to marry and become fathers.


At 6:16 PM, Anonymous said…

Going on from the suggestion of ‘naming and shaming’ those who flout custody and contact orders, why not name and shame all those feminists and politicians that have helped create the mess. Feminism is the enemy of the family, the family which used to take care of children. Politicians have made it so ‘families’ are better off separated than being together.

The budget for feminists and politicians pensions should be taken off them to give to the single parents. They have helped destroy the family, they should pay for it!!
And don’t forget that according to CSA statistics, a higher proportion of females than men fail to pay. Lets see lots of these women on display, 50/50 in equal numbers !!! Don’t discriminate against women !!

And yes my American friend, as a former proud Englishmen i know full well that my country has fallen into the abyss. When our forefathers were celebrating victory after the victory over the evil Nazi and Japanese war machines, were they thinking that in 60 years time Christmas itself would be threatened??
I am right in thinking communists won the cold war, aren’t i ??


At 6:31 PM, Anonymous said…

If a man can be forced to pay for children because a woman chose to get pregnant, then that man must also have the option to force her to have an abortion.


At 7:22 PM, Anonymous said…

Refrain: “My Body. My Choice.”

Right on sister.

Your Body. Your Choice. Your Responsibility.

Time to grow up little girls.


At 7:25 PM, Anonymous said…

Ministers are planning to publish the names of absent parents who refuse to pay maintenance for their children.

Mens Rights Guerillas are planning to publish the names of ministers who sodomize alter boys.


At 7:30 PM, R. Paul Thomas said…

You know…the saddest thing about this is that minister’s should have been the first to speak out against the destruction of the family by the corrupt system.

But, I guess, retaining one’s tax exempt status is more important than doing the right thing.

I wouldn’t presume to tell anyone what Jesus would do…but I sincerely doubt He would condone this despicable behavior on the part of those claiming to preach His word.


At 4:11 PM, Jerkmenistan said…

What I’d very much like to see is a mandatory accounting for how custodial parents spend the child support they receive. While I understand that tracking such expenditures is an extremely difficult task, perhaps it would be possible for a court to require it upon receiving a petition from the non-custodial parent accompanied by proof of misuse of funds. If misuse of funds is proven (i.e. spent on HER needs, not those of the child(ren)), then custody should be seriously reconsidered.

Child support is supposed to be for the benefit of the child(ren), not the custodial parent. Malfeasance in spending child support funding demonstrates, at the very least, an unfitness to be a custodial parent, and at the most, fraud on the family court system. If more women were subject to having their children taken away for malfeasance, there would be two significant improvements in the status quo: (1) less children born out of wedlock in order to receive a financial windfall, and (2) fewer divorces.


At 1:04 PM, flowerpot72 said…

I have been trying to get my ex husband to pay regular child maintenance for over 3 years now and the CSA have dgragged their heels every steps of the way. I seem to be doing all the work myself eg name of employer, telephone and fax numbers, all possible contact numbers for ex husband etc. Finally, just 3 weeks ago my case worker rang to say he had everything in place for an Attachment of Earnings Order and just yesterday, 24 January I got a phone call advising me my ex husband has quit his job once again!!! I am currently out of work – I have no maintenance EVER – I want to name and shame the man who claims to love his child so much – but will not face his legal obligation and is constantly dodging the CSA. Where on earth do I go from here?


%d bloggers like this: