Comments by "Dragonze Watermellon" (@dargonwatermellon) on "VICE Life" channel.

  1. 3
  2. 3
  3. 3
  4. 3
  5. 3
  6. 3
  7. 3
  8. 3
  9. 3
  10. 3
  11. 3
  12. 3
  13. 3
  14. 3
  15. 3
  16. Gabriel Lewicki actually it's not that you are financially obligated to take care of the women during marriage or after divorce. It is the fact that if the women is a housewife then all of your wages are consider community thus, every penny that you made will be shared (as it should) in the family as *she has to stay home to baby sit the kids almost 24/7 and maintain/upkeep the home. * After the divorce you have to pay up because the damn child is still considered part of your responsibility thus you have to pay for child support until that child is fully grown at 18 years of age. To avoid all those ridiculous complications it's actually very easy, you just need to get a vasectomy so that you will be absolutely sure that you won't have any accidental brats that you will absolutely have to pay for if that ever comes to it. Easy right? You should tell that to as many misogynistic males as possibly about the vasectomy solution, it will prevent your own potential loses in the future! After all, who would want to lose their money to raising some damn brats right? And btw you made an excellent decision on not getting marry, this is not a sarcasm! I praise you for that decision as it will save a lot of women from men like you, but it's also good that you recognize there are benefits to not stick with patriarchal traditions. Btw to the men that is too late in to their mistake on having kids and paying the divorce price, ask your ex-wife if she will take over full parental rights of the child, basically you will relinquish your rights to the child entirely and ask that your wife to change all the children name to her last name and thus these children are solely hers and that you will absolutely have no connection with the children. Most men won't like that because they basically *wants to have the cake and eat it too*, lol, they don't want any responsibility of taking care of their brats, but wants the benefit of getting acknowledged as a father. To get that recognition of "father", you need to pay the courtesy price set by the court for your wife to raise your brats. You can't have it both ways.
    3
  17. 3
  18. 3
  19. 2
  20. 2
  21. 2
  22. 2
  23. 2
  24. 2
  25. 2
  26. 2
  27. 2
  28. 2
  29. 2
  30. MultiOmps this can perfectly describe what I have been stated for men that's complaining about inequality for their gender: "Imagine you're reading a Dr. Seuss book about a bunch of beasts living on an island. There are two kinds of beasts: Fleetches and Flootches. (Stick with me here! I love you!) Though the two are functionally identical in terms of intellect and general competence, Fleetches are in charge of pretty much everything. They hold the majority of political positions, they make the most money (beast-bucks!), they dominate the beast media, they enact all kinds of laws infringing on the bodily autonomy of Flootches. Individually, most of them are perfectly nice beasts, but collectively they benefit comfortably from inequalities that are historically entrenched in the power structure of Beast Island. So, from birth, even the most unfortunate Fleetches encounter fewer institutional roadblocks and greater opportunity than almost all Flootches, regardless of individual merit. One day, a group of Flootches (the ones who have not internalized their inferiority) get together and decide to agitate to change that system. They call their movement "Flootchism," because it is specifically intended to address problems that disproportionately disadvantage Flootches while benefiting Fleetches. That makes sense, right? Now imagine that, in response, a bunch of Fleetches begin complaining that Flootchism doesn't address their needs, and they have problems too, and therefore the movement should really be renamed Beastism. To be fair. The problem with that name change is that it that undermines the basic mission of the movement, because it obscures (deliberately, I'd warrant) that beast society is inherently weighted against Flootches. It implies that all problems are just beast problems, and that all beasts suffer comparably, which cripples the very necessary effort to prioritize and repair problems that are Flootch-specific. Those problems are a priority because they harm all Flootches, systematically, whereas Fleetch problems merely harm individual Fleetches. To argue that all problems are just "beast problems" is to discredit the idea of inequality altogether. It is, in fact, insulting." More of that little story here http://jezebel.com/5992479/if-i-admit-that-hating-men-is-a-thing-will-you-stop-turning-it-into-a-self-fulfilling-prophecy
    2
  31. 2
  32. 2
  33. 2
  34. 2
  35. 2
  36. 2
  37. 2
  38. 2
  39. 2
  40. 2
  41. 2
  42. 2
  43. 2
  44. 2
  45. 2
  46. 2
  47. 2
  48. 2
  49. 2
  50. 2