Friday, September 30, 2011

Post-Apocalyptic All-Female Celibate Society

I'm trying my hand at a short, sci-fi story:

A post-apocalyptic, all-female band of survivors re-populates the world via IVF and brain cell regeneration.

What can I say? In my younger days I spent many hours curled up with Robert Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, Frank Herbert, Harlan Ellison and Ray Bradbury...

Monday, September 19, 2011

Dissing the Judge Is Never A Good Idea

Two words: Joe Walsh.

Walsh, a Tea Party freshman Congressman, owes over $117,000 in alleged child support arrears, while stoking up the right-wing media over government spending, and calling out the President of the United States as a liar who is "in over [his] head."

He didn't bother to show up for his oft-adjourned child support hearing last week, because of his position as a Member of the House. (Not like he was actually doing something important in DC on the day of the hearing.) To which the Judge replied, “Well, he’s no different than anyone else.” The Judge's comment was actually consistent with the position taken by Walsh's, ummm, fourth(?) lawyer, that he's just like "any other average guy." You know, that average "Joe Sixpack" kind of guy who has trouble meeting his child support obligations.

Wait a minute.

Since when is the average American support obligor a deadbeat? And if it's so "average" (i.e. normal) to be a deadbeat dad, does that make it okay? (Note to Levi Johnston: Tea Party matron Sarah Palin won't mind if you skip paying child support to still-unwed Bristol.)

Child support orders can be onerous, and even downright nutty - Lord knows I've had a few of those issued against some of my clients. Sometimes they're far too meagre, I've had those, also. Sometimes judges actually do something about bizarre orders - although they usually don't. I've been on both sides of enforcement proceedings. Lord knows, they're an even bigger nightmare.

The thought of F-f-f-f-family Court makes my skin turn a nasty shade of green.

But in any event, you don't just ignore the damn court date.
Judge scolds Rep. Joe Walsh in child-support case with ex-wife - Chicago Sun-Times

Thursday, September 15, 2011

Men Pay A Steep Price For Lust (Or Lack Thereof)

Everyone knows that men often think only with their ****s. Especially men who are powerful enough to believe their lewd actions won't have major repercussions on their marriages, their careers and their lives.

Obvious recent examples of over-sexed, self-destructive men:
*Bill Clinton, who demolished his presidential legacy and forever tarnished his reputation.
*Tiger Woods, whose escapades as a man-whore practically overshadowed his legendary (but now-fading) golf prowess, and drove him from the sport, sponsorships and, of course, his wife and kids.
*John Edwards, who ruined his political life and probably helped to loosen his wife's already-tenuous hold on life.
*DSK, who lost his IMF chairmanship and checked into Riker's Island for a few days.
*Elliott Weiner, who thought his own wiener was so photogenic that he lost his Congressional seat and handed it over to the House Republicans.

But maybe you didn't know that men also pay heavily for lacking a strong enough sexual appetite.

In France - yes, France where male ardor is a matter of national pride! - a 51-year-old man was recently socked with paying his ex-wife 8500 Euros for his lackluster performance in the bedroom. Not just for a few months, either, but for 21 years, which I think is a mighty long time for any self-respecting woman to wait for some serious attention. A little Viagra along the way could have saved the thin-blooded Jean-Louis B. a pile of money. It could have saved his marriage, too, since his failure to satisfy his wife was grounds for the divorce.

Damned if they do it (with someone else), damned if they don't do it (for a really really long time) with their wives. There's a lesson there, guys.

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Women Must Sacrifice Career for Family? Really?

I'm so sick of the assumption that women - women attorneys in particular - can't hack working full-time and having a family. That women - the masters of multi-tasking - require reduced hours and telecommuting in order to raise their kids while holding down a job.

Oh really?

Guess that means that successful women who work their butts off full-time are, ipso facto, utterly incapable of having equally rewarding personal lives. Or that working women are destined to be either professional slugs or crappy wives and moms.


And what role, pray tell, are men supposed to play in this absurd scenario? I guess, circa 1955, they're the real professionals, the bread-winners without shared family responsibilities. The ones who bring home the bacon to the "little woman" changing diapers while she's wearing her apron, cooking dinner for the family before going back to her part-time telecommuting job.

Here's the link to an ABA Journal article I just read with total disgust, that perpetuates this kind of ridiculous, last-millenium mindset.
At 50 Best Law Firms for Women, Policies Allowing Reduced Hours and Telecommuting Are the Norm - News - ABA Journal