Archive for the ‘single mothers’ Category

More leniancy for female child killers
September 12, 2007


02 February 2007

Mom gets 10 years for drowning kids

Amanda Hamm, 30, was convicted in December in the deaths of Christopher Hamm, 6, Austin Brown, 3, and Kyleigh Hamm, 1, who were trapped in the car in Clinton Lake in 2003. She was cleared of first-degree murder charges that would have sent her to prison for life.

Prosecutors allege Hamm and then-boyfriend Maurice LaGrone Jr. planned the deaths because the children were in the way of their relationship.


Ten measly years, of which she’ll probably serve about half, for killing her three little kids.

What a fucking joke. Still, it’s not really surprise any more, having an Almighty Vagina gets you off either scot free or at least with a light sentence.

Note that her boyfriend, who helped her kill the kids, is serving life without parole. Then again, he doesn’t have an Almighty Vagina, and thus is held responsible for his actions. Ideally, the pair of them should be just be hanged.

Her boyfriend wasn’t the father of the kids either. Imagine how shit that must be for the dad, that his three children were killed by their mother and her new thug lover because they were “in the way”, and not only that, the bitch will serve no more than a decade.


Murderous hag
September 11, 2007


31 January 2007


Wife guilty of Marine’s arsenic murder

Jurors found a woman guilty of poisoning her Marine husband with arsenic so she could spend $250,000 in veteran’s benefits on luxuries including breast implants.

That’s strange, I thought women were so pure and innocent and never did anything bad unless a man put them up to it or provoked them? I’m surprised she didn’t play the Domestic Violence card.

I’m still wondering why the dead guy ever bothered to hook up with an aging divorcee with three kids by another man anyway. How silly.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 7:03 PM


Old single-mother-by-choice seeks a maaayn!
September 11, 2007


29 January 2007


“I’m a good catch guys! I’ve got two illegitimate
kids, lots of debt and my own bus-pass!

Woman who lied to get IVF at 67 seeks a younger husband to help with twins

Exhausted and short of money, the world’s oldest mother is seeking a younger husband to be a father to her twins.

In her first interview since giving birth last month, Carmela Bousada, a 67-year-old Spaniard, said that she had sold her house in Andalucia to raise the £30,000 to pay for fertility treatment at a California clinic, where she lied about her age. The clinic’s age limit is 55.


Ms Bousada told the News of the World: “I think everyone should become a mother at the right time for them. Maybe things shouldn’t have been done in the way they were done but that was the only way to achieve the thing I had always dreamt of.

What a selfish cunt. It would be bad enough if she was married and got pregnant three-years shy of 70 but she’s single, and displaying all the amorality we’ve come to expect of modern Western women, she decided she wanted a baby and that’s all that mattered. Not the children, they don’t matter. Who cares, it seems, that they’re illegitimate bastards, who’ll spend their childhoods probably looking after their elderly selfish mother?

This is what happens when society is stupid enough to let single women get pregnant by IVF. She even knows this, admitting that “things shouldn’t have been done in the way they were done” but, hey, fuck it, she wanted something and, being a modern woman, she’s not going to let anything like morality or such shit get in the way of that. “Me me me me me me meeeeee!”

This is bit though shows how deluded she is:

“Now I’ve got to look for a dad for the kids. I’d like to meet someone a bit younger than me. They’d have to like the children, of course.”

Oooh yeah, hold me back! I’d just luuuurve to marry a 67-year-old pensioner who looks like Zelda from Terrahawks and look after the babies she’s had by another man!

What a blithering dumb fuck! Even hot looking single mothers in their 20s are ignored by all sane men, so what makes her think guys will want a wretched old hag in her late 60s who has kids?

She’s also typical of the so-called “independent” woman these days, as in not independent at all. She had to go to a clinic to get pregnant and get help from the doctors, and now she’s whining for a man to come and help her.

Pathetic. It’s a shame for the two kids especially.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 10:02 PM


Predictions for luuurve in 2007
September 5, 2007


06 January 2007


April Masini; relationship expert, advice columnist,
and probably allergic to sunlight and garlic too

This “article” and its contents of the blithering of various women and a few token guys (mostly manginas) is not to be taken seriously, even less so than your average article from women about relationships. It’s just a load of silly self-professed relationship experts, authors and advice columnists trying to market their books and websites. But they try their best to be sincere so I’ll take them as being sincere and laugh at them.

“2007 will continue to be an era of ‘convenience-dating’ – online dating, speed dating, and for the younger generation, getting dates via social networking sites,” predicts Hilary Black. “More than ever, single people — especially in urban areas — are far less anxious to settle down and get married.”

Hmmmm. Strange how we’re always being told the people – including women, no doubt – are “less anxious to settle down and marry.” Maybe young women who can easily go and get another boyfriend to replace the current one think like that, but I don’t ever seem to see women past the age of 28 or thereabouts who are keen on ‘convenience-dating’. At that age, convenience dating tends to mean just getting sport-fucked. Assuming any guys pay attention to them.


Not afraid to shoot strangers
September 3, 2007


28 December 2006

Fear of Strangers: The rise in random killings indicates a disturbing increase in violence

There has always been a peculiar sort of comfort in the knowledge that, in the context of a relatively low murder rate, we [in the UK] are all more likely to be killed by a lover or spouse than by a stranger. To die at the hands of a stranger seems, somehow, even more horrifying. So today’s discovery by The Times, that random killings have increased by a third in just eight years to the point where they now equal the number of murders carried out as crimes of passion, is alarming.


The figures must be kept in perspective. Stranger murders, which rose from 99 in 1997 to 130 last year, still account for less than 10 per cent of the annual total. But the increase certainly puts reassurances about crime levels in a different light.

The increases have been largest in London, and Devon & Cornwall. It is not clear what these two regions have in common, except large numbers of disaffected young men who seem to be the most common perpetrators and also the most frequent victims.


The similarities between the approach taken by Greater Manchester Police and those in New York City are striking. In both places, police have made enormous headway by taking a zero-tolerance approach to criminal gangs and petty crime, and by backing grassroots efforts to lure young men away from both.

Interesting that they actually deign to note that men are more likely to be the victims of this rise in seemingly random homicide. But also note that they point out that it is likely to be “disaffected young men” carrying out such crimes. Indeed, although women are quite capable – and, these days, more than willing – to be violent, it cannot be denied that men are more likely to be behind these random acts of melees, mayhem, murder and mischief. Women are certainly increasingly violent too, often hanging out in gangs and getting up to yobbishness. However, it seems a majority are men and boys, and more importantly “disaffected young men.”

These men are disaffected how? And why?


Another huge bill caused by feminism’s devastation of the family
August 29, 2007


19 December 2006

Children’s centres ‘must do more’

State-funded children’s centres must do much more to help teenage parents and single mothers, a report says.

The National Audit Office (NAO) found that fewer than a third of the 200 Sure Start centres it investigated were making efforts to reach the most needy.

It also said while families valued the scheme, it was hard to measure whether the £3.2bn investment was good value.

Fucking hell, £3,200,000,000! For “children’s centres” primarily for single mothers?

Strange how these weren’t needed before. Y’know, before feminism knackered in the family and removed fathers from many children’s lives, and whelping illegitimate bastards was encouraged financially.

All this crap about how father’s are not necessary, that therefore free IVF can be given to single mummy’s, and underage slappers who give birth whilst at school (literally) are not in anyway judged, yet these fatherless children seem to need an outrageous amount of taxpayers money to help their poor mummy’s cope.

Without fathers, these kids are more likely to wallow in poverty and spend more time with strangers.

Still, this is what the “It takes a village”-minded Socialists/Feminists want; fathers well away from children, and kiddies spending more time in school, after-school clubs, daycare camps and children’s centres.

Note how they worry that this might be a waste of money, but only in that it might be a waste for those who may use this service. Why don’t they ask us taxpayers whether we think it’s value for money? I sure as hell don’t. Even in the context of all the taxpayers money being flung around in the high-taxation, high-spending Socialist wreck of a nation this cuntry has become, £3,200,000,000 is still a shitload of money.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 11:30 PM


Father’s not necessary IVF ruling moves a step closer
August 28, 2007


14 December 2006

IVF father figure clause is to go

The government is set to abolish the requirement for fertility clinics to consider the need for a father when deciding whether to offer treatment.

This has been planned for a while and the fact that no-one in authority dares publicly criticise single mothers means it’s long since been the case that fathers are regarded as unnecessary.

This just puts the final nail in the coffin for us men; we’re now officially irrelevant in the UK.

But wait…what’s this? We do have a purpose after all.

Yes, apparantly, children don’t need fathers, but by golly single mothers need men’s money.

So us men are, according the government, no more than sperm donors and walking wallets.


Rise of the single mothers, fall of decent society
August 28, 2007


11 December 2006

We all know family breakdown is destroying us. Don’t talk, fix it

Not only do we have the objective evidence to show, beyond any possibility of rational doubt, that the decline of marriage has had disastrous consequences for the community, but we can demonstrate that successive governments have effectively bribed mothers to remain single and keep their children fatherless.


Marriage provides the best conditions for raising children – OK? It is better than lone parenting because two people can cope much more effectively with the staggeringly difficult business of raising children properly – OK? Marriage is better for children than cohabitation because it is more likely to be stable and long lasting: one in two cohabiting couples split up before their child’s fifth birthday, compared with only one in 12 married couples – OK? Seventy per cent of young offenders come from lone-parent families; children from broken homes are 70 per cent more likely to become drug addicts. OK, OK, OK. We know all this. We have heard it over and over and over again.

Labour are not just bribing women to become single mothers they’re fully encouraging it.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 9:20 PM


“Name and shame” those who don’t/can’t pay for women’s bastards
August 28, 2007


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.


Us poor men, destroyed by feminism apparantly.
August 28, 2007


08 December 2006

Feminism was going to liberate both sexes, but instead it destroyed a generation of men

This is one of a number of articles that regularly crops up, triumphing the successes women have supposedly made over the last few decades (but forever failing to mention the big helping hand from Daddy Government that they needed) but bemoaning about how it has harmed men.

Naturally, the whole underlying complaint in these sorts of articles is that, far from being concerned about how this all effects men, they only care about how this will, in turn, effect women.

Plus there are all sorts of laughable claims of how brilliant and independent women are when, clearly, they’re not.


Vice-Prez’s Lezzer Daughter Preggerz
August 27, 2007


07 December 2006

Mixed reaction to Cheney’s daughter’s pregnancy

Mary Cheney, 37, and her partner of 15 years, Heather Poe, 45, are expecting a baby in late spring, said Lea Anne McBride, a spokeswoman for the vice president.

Poor kid. Raised by two lesbians. That’s even worse than being raised by a single mother.

Janice Crouse of Concerned Women for America described the pregnancy as “unconscionable.”

“It’s very disappointing that a celebrity couple like this would deliberately bring into the world a child that will never have a father,” said Crouse, a senior fellow at the group’s think tank. “They are encouraging people who don’t have the advantages they have.”

Damn right. Why don’t more women speak out against their illegitimate-bastard spawning sistahs?

The news was welcomed by the president of the largest national gay-rights group, Joe Solmonese of the Human Rights Campaign.

“Mary and Heather’s decision to have a child is an example that families in America come in all different shapes and sizes,” he said. “The bottom line is that a family is made up of love and commitment.”

Oh, blow it out your spunk-filled arse you big puff. Families may come in different sizes, but not in different shapes; a family is a married couple and their kids, simple as that. It’s not a slag and her illegitimate bastards, or two rug-munchers/shit-stabbers and their bastards-in-a-bottle from the sperm bank.

I feel so sorry for the kid. Oh well, only one of millions who, thanks to feminism, will grow up without a father.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 6:10 PM


Taxes, taxes and more taxes
August 27, 2007


07 December 2006

Brown launches green tax grab as he sinks even further into the red

Despite having already spent some £4,000bn since 1997, the Chancellor admitted he still needs to tax and borrow more to finance the public sector in the coming years.

More taxes for us Brits, even though public services are getting shitter and the welfare state, although bloated, is primarily only there to help women. They’re even giving Child Benefit to women before they’ve even given birth, primarily for poor women (read: single mothers) because the silly little dears can’t possibly be expected to afford scratchcards and Silk Cut and still have money left over to feed themselves.


Single mothers better off
August 26, 2007


27 November 2006

Single mothers get £100 more in tax credits a week than working couple

Single parents on the poverty line are getting over £100 a week more in state benefits than couples facing the same difficulties, a new report says.

The huge difference in the treatment of single parents and married couples is plunging millions of children into poverty and encouraging couples to live apart or break up, it said.


The report, produced by the family charity CARE, comes at a time of growing concern about the built-in bias towards single mothers in the benefits system.

Lone mothers qualify for special rights to get housing, extra payments in benefits like Income Support, and are targeted by schemes like Sure Start that provide help, advice and childcare

The government has blatantly been encouraging divorce and out-of-wedlock births. They know that a family headed by a man is independent, unlike a “family” consisting of a woman and her kids, which is invariably dependent on the government and thus easy to push around. Plus, of course, feminism’s primary aim was to push men out of families (but to ensure they are still financially responsible – whether directly through Child Support or indirectly through taxes – for women and children) and they have certainly succeeded.


Super Nanny State
August 9, 2007


21 November 2006

‘Super-nannies’ to help parents

“Super nannies” are to be brought in to try to improve parenting in 77 areas of England with high levels of anti-social behaviour, Tony Blair has said. The prime minister is to give more details of the £4m scheme later.

Why should hard-working taxpayers have to fork out four-million-quid to try and lessen the effects of shit parenting?

Or shit single-parenting. There may be a fair number of yobs and hooligans from two-parent families but they are far more likely to come from single-parent ones, stupid slags getting knocked up, failing to raise their bastards properly because they’re busy still whoring around, and their kids end up hanging out on the streets, using the local drug-dealers and thieves as role-models, the only ones they have save for a long string of “uncles.”

[Blair said] “But life isn’t normal when you’ve got 12-year-olds out every night, drinking and creating a nuisance on the street, with their parents not knowing or even caring.”

Actually, it is normal in a Matriarchy, which is what we increasingly have these days thanks to feminism.


Selfish cunt
August 8, 2007


17 November 2006


Motherhood is my right

No, motherhood is NOT your fucking right. If you leave it too late, or your sex started a “liberation” movement like feminism that made fatherhood too risky for men, tough shit.

A growing generation of single career women are reaching their late 30s unmarried but still desperate to become mothers. Many are embarking on parenthood alone – and their quest will soon be made easier.

Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt wants the law changed to allow single women and lesbians to have fertility treatment without the need to prove there will be a father figure in the child’s life.

Here, Ruth Yahel, a 41-year-old TV production executive, explains why she decided from the outset to be a lone parent, and why – in her opinion – they should not be vilified:

Say what you want you whore, you will be vilified by all decent people.

Single mothers by choice are utterly selfish disgusting cunts. They are invariably parasites and a drain on the country. Even if they work they will use tax-subsidised child-care. Even if they do pay their way and don’t require any taxpayer support, they are still scum who are guilty of Child Abuse because they inflict illegitimacy on a child deliberately just because they want a baybeeeeh but can’t/won’t get a man.


From the comments
August 2, 2007


10 November 2006

This rant landed in the comments section of a recent post of mine, from someone called “Willie“:

You probably won’t post this. Who really cares. But this site is ridiculous. Any man knows that men still enjoy privledge. It seems you are just upset cuz you can’t go out and club a woman over her head, drag her back to your apartment and then rape her just for a quick thrill and to spread your pathetic seed. Get over yourself.

Rather than indulge in mud-slinging and insults, I think it’s worth politely pointing out and expanding my viewpoint to this chap, for what it’s worth.

For starters, if he thinks the idea of thuggish men beating women, dragging them off to rape them and impregnating them is bad, then alarmingly we actually have something in common. I have no such desire to do such a thing or to leave women open to such treatment either.

However, ironically, it is a post-feminist society that removes the restraints on women that makes this scenario more likely.

Before feminism, women were looked down upon for getting knocked up by thugs and losers, and not having the right to an abortion meant they had to be careful and only hook up with nice-guys. Divorce was frowned upon too, so women better make sure they’re hooked up with a decent chap, not some “exciting” but obnoxious criminal. Plus girls grew up with a father-figure to represent the strong-but-considerate male figure they should seek when selecting a mate. A father would also protect his daughter.


Have a cigarette, or save baby? Hmmm. Decisions decisions…
August 2, 2007


10 November 2006

Mother broke off CPR to have a smoke, court told

A woman whose baby boy died of a methadone overdose took a break from trying to save the six-month-old with mouth to mouth resuscitation because she wanted a cigarette, a court has been told.


Ms Sava called for an ambulance and the triple-0 operator talked her and the baby’s mother through mouth to mouth and CPR.

But during the procedure, the baby’s mother said she wanted a cigarette, Ms Sava said.

“She took the cigarette out of the packet, went to light it and then she put it back in the packet,” she said.

“I said ‘not now, the ambulance is on its way’.”

A reader kindly sent me this link a few weeks ago but I rather discourteously forgot to post it up. I’ve hunted around for any update on the trial but been able to do so.

It’s good to see the mother – clearly a junkie single-mum – is charged with murder, although I doubt if she’ll be convicted. She’ll probably get a few years for child neglect. Note she’s not even identified publicly. A guy accused of rape will have his name plastered all over the place, but a woman charged with the murder of her baby will be protected. I suppose that’s so she can have a nice normal life when she’s swiftly released in the near future, assuming she serves any time at all. What a bitch.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 8:10 PM


Some of the “incalculable good” feminism has done
August 1, 2007


07 November 2006


The breakdown in family life that threatens us all

This recent report that British teenagers are the randiest, booziest, ASBO-receivingist delinquents in the entire Universe has lead to lots of commentary, but as many have pointed out, most commentators and certainly all politicians skirt round the primary cause of all this, namely the absence of fathers in many children’s lives which was a direct goal – and a direct result – of feminism.

This article fortunately does get closer to the problem, although still not perfectly.

Next, look at schools. Why are millions of pupils — and I mean millions — bored out of their skulls? Why do so many teachers feel stifled by diktats and a narrowly prescriptive curriculum? What is there at most schools to hold the interest of non-academic children when the staff are so focused on cramming kids for meaningless exams? And why do thousands drop out of learning, and out of society, before they are 14?

It’s more likely to be boys dropping out, because most are tired of schoolteachers who are predominantly female and often feminists. Furthermore, us guys have been told we’re not needed by women, that we’re not needed as providers anymore; so why the fuck bother working hard to be a good provider? Furthermore, most young men want to get laid; that’s the main aim in their life as teenagers. Thanks to feminism, girls are now devoid of responsibility and restraint, with it being seen as patriarchal oppression to keep them on a leash, and a many only have a single slut-bag mother as a “role model” and no father in their lives. It’s no surprise they often go after bad-boy thugs. If you’ve got a hard-working straight-A boy of 15 who is already selecting which A-Levels to take and which University to go to, and another boy who is the same age and has been expelled, doesn’t go to school, hangs out on street corners drinking cider and hassling strangers for cash and has several convictions for car theft and public disorder, who do you think is more likely to have a gaggle of girls offering to suck his dick (I’ll give you a clue; it’s the same one who is more likely to have been raised by a single mum.) What’s the point in a teenage boy knuckling down and working hard when, thanks to feminism freeing their restraints, teenage girls will snub him and go to the drop-outs and thugs (until she’s been knocked up and needs a sucker)?


Woman actually held liable for bad-boy lover’s actions
July 31, 2007


02 November 2006

Mother allowed baby son’s murder

A 21-year-old woman has been found guilty of the new charge of familial homicide by failing to prevent her baby son’s murder by her partner.

Rebecca Lewis’s 13-month-old son Aaron Gilbert died from brain damage in May 2005. He had suffered 50 injuries.

Her partner at the time, Andrew Lloyd, 23, pleaded guilty to murder at Swansea Crown Court. The pair are due to be sentenced together at a later date.

Lewis denied familial homicide. She is one of the first to face the charge.

A rather surprising judgement, bearing in mind women are often given a slap on the wrist or even less for personally slaying their children! This woman was actually convicted of a charge of effectively letting her bad-boy thug shit-head lover abuse and kill her baby.

Any sane society would have taken the child off of her and given him to his dad or, at least, to social services. They should have known about the abuse, given the intrusion into private lives the government indulges in.

Or is that only when there’s a father to blame?


Wrap up well
July 31, 2007


02 November 2006


Duct tape no substitute for a babysitter, police say

A woman accused of duct-taping her two children together and leaving them home alone has been charged with child abuse, the sheriff’s office said.

Agla Nadia Vincent, 25, was arrested Monday following a seven-month investigation into whether she left her two boys, then aged 2 and 3, taped to each other while she went to work, said Lt. Annie Smith of the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office.


In March, a witness heard the children crying and called the police. When military police arrived, they found the children taped in a bedroom with feces and cereal scattered on play mats on the floor, investigators said.

But daycare is soooo expensive!

No mention of a father, naturally. Probably ditched and divorced a long time ago, assuming she bothered to marry him first, and assuming she knows who he is. And assuming they have the same father!

Gotta love that deadpan headline though.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 6:50 PM


%d bloggers like this: