What Knee-Jerk Feminists, Their PC Partisans, and Judges Need to Understand about Why People Complain about the Abuse of Restraining Orders and Family Court, Domestic Violence, and Child Protection Procedures

Some posts on this site have concerned exposing and articulating legal frauds, and the challenges these acts face, such as distrust and disinterest from the public, and censorship from the powers that be. The focus of posts past has been divided between efforts to encourage the wronged to talk back and efforts to chasten the rigid views of those who would diminish, derogate, or dismiss their complaints.

This post is directed exclusively toward detractors, particularly dogmatic feminists and judges. This is what you need to understand. What you think motivates people to complain of legal abuse is wrong.

There are plenty of feminist attention-seekers, and they seem to be of the opinion that complainants of legal abuse are like them. They’re not. They’re people who want their lives back. They’re not interested in “debate” or a fan following; they want(ed) to be left alone.

Besides its direct consequences (i.e., privation), the pain of legal abuse is that it’s public. For its victims to openly acknowledge they’ve been abused, then, is to exacerbate their pain. This is not a decision made lightly or an undertaking embraced with gusto, which is why public complaints are few and often anonymous.

No one does this for shits and giggles.

Both feminists and judges may believe complainants of legal abuse are trying to “get even.” How, with a “blog” post—or with 100 “blog” posts? There is no “getting even.” People abused by legal process want relief from slurs and false allegations that are preserved as public records and that may have cost them everything. They want restoration.

A bizarre misconception prevails that the person who counter-accuses someone is hung up on that person. What s/he wants is that person (and the court) out of his or her life. But how is a falsely accused person to achieve that? Recourse to the law doesn’t avail, because law in this area has been corrupted. So s/he’s stuck (literally) with exposing the shenanigans of some cretin, creep, or kook who means absolutely nothing. S/he’s stuck because of what that cretin, creep, or kook took, whether that was his or her dignity, peace of mind, security, livelihood, property, or family (or all of the above).

can_I_stalk_him2Complainants of legal abuse may “live” under constant threat. One successful false accusation not only invites but may encourage an endless number, particularly from a “high-conflict” person. The only alternative for some to looking over their shoulders day and night is exposing their tormentors and making everything a matter of public accountability. It’s not about exhibitionism.

Knee-jerk feminists and judges want to believe complainants of injustice are enjoying a game and not that accusers are. The accused’s lives aren’t a game, and those lives have been hijacked. Many vocal feminists and all judges are paid to play games; the legally abused are not.

Copyright © 2016 RestrainingOrderAbuse.com

*And if the “rantings” of the legally abused seem raw and unpolished, that’s why. They’re not professional disputants; they’re normal joes and janes who are distraught, anguished, or unhinged. Note: A person doesn’t endure these outrages and not become unhinged.