They only recently moved FT to TN. Meghan lost custody in October.Anonymous wrote:When Jim moved to Tennessee, how did he and Meghan share custody if she was in St. Louis?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between defending someone and being cynical about what a rich and powerful man's PR team has leaked to the media and achieved through the family court system.
Then you would post as such instead of the screeds that have been posted on this thread about people just “knowing” Jim must be a narcissistic abuser manipulating the courts. All of these rants painting Meghan as a victim would be more factual rather than just “feelings” that poor Meghan is being mistreated. Instead of you know, the people actually being mistreated - her kids?
The allegation came via third-party quote from a woman who'd seen video footage of prior custody exchanges and she described Jim as being rageful and frightening and putting thd kids in the middle of the conflict where Meghsb tried to shield them. Her organization is a watchdog for abusers. The organization is One Mom’s Battle.
Multiple posters made the same claims earlier in the thread. And you’ve lost the plot if you believe anything from One Mom’s Battle.
Of course, as a group of educated moms, we believe in One Mom's Battle and in the work they are doing to help children and mothers. You now sound like the problem.
She has an extreme bias and agenda and needs to keep that in everything she says and does as that is how she makes a living. Kind of skews her narrative when you can already predict exactly what she will say about each case.
+1 People need to stop being so gullible about this woman.
I know Tina Swithin and you and the other PP have not one single iota of a clue what you are talking about and you are simply dead wrong. But I know that won't mean a thing to you. You won't take the time to listen to or read her story (she herself is a child of divorce and she was raised by her *father* who she says was the healthier of her two parents), how she advocates for *childrens' rights* and supports *protective parents* (whether that is the mother or the father), and she also talks about the name "One Mom's Battle" and how she chose that name over 15 years ago when she started a little unknown blog at the time, documenting her own (as the mother, as in "one mom") battle and how that name doesn't fit anymore but it has become so synonymous with her advocacy platform that it would be too difficult to change.
You’d be wrong. Which is why you and others posting about One Mom and all these narcissistic rants are so incredibly dangerous.
You can keep trying to undermine with your unmitigated one-line BS responses with zero details or facts, it won't work.
Pot meet kettle.
You have a reading comprehension problem.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between defending someone and being cynical about what a rich and powerful man's PR team has leaked to the media and achieved through the family court system.
Then you would post as such instead of the screeds that have been posted on this thread about people just “knowing” Jim must be a narcissistic abuser manipulating the courts. All of these rants painting Meghan as a victim would be more factual rather than just “feelings” that poor Meghan is being mistreated. Instead of you know, the people actually being mistreated - her kids?
The allegation came via third-party quote from a woman who'd seen video footage of prior custody exchanges and she described Jim as being rageful and frightening and putting thd kids in the middle of the conflict where Meghsb tried to shield them. Her organization is a watchdog for abusers. The organization is One Mom’s Battle.
Multiple posters made the same claims earlier in the thread. And you’ve lost the plot if you believe anything from One Mom’s Battle.
Of course, as a group of educated moms, we believe in One Mom's Battle and in the work they are doing to help children and mothers. You now sound like the problem.
She has an extreme bias and agenda and needs to keep that in everything she says and does as that is how she makes a living. Kind of skews her narrative when you can already predict exactly what she will say about each case.
+1 People need to stop being so gullible about this woman.
I know Tina Swithin and you and the other PP have not one single iota of a clue what you are talking about and you are simply dead wrong. But I know that won't mean a thing to you. You won't take the time to listen to or read her story (she herself is a child of divorce and she was raised by her *father* who she says was the healthier of her two parents), how she advocates for *childrens' rights* and supports *protective parents* (whether that is the mother or the father), and she also talks about the name "One Mom's Battle" and how she chose that name over 15 years ago when she started a little unknown blog at the time, documenting her own (as the mother, as in "one mom") battle and how that name doesn't fit anymore but it has become so synonymous with her advocacy platform that it would be too difficult to change.
You’d be wrong. Which is why you and others posting about One Mom and all these narcissistic rants are so incredibly dangerous.
You can keep trying to undermine with your unmitigated one-line BS responses with zero details or facts, it won't work.
Pot meet kettle.
Pot meet kettle.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between defending someone and being cynical about what a rich and powerful man's PR team has leaked to the media and achieved through the family court system.
Then you would post as such instead of the screeds that have been posted on this thread about people just “knowing” Jim must be a narcissistic abuser manipulating the courts. All of these rants painting Meghan as a victim would be more factual rather than just “feelings” that poor Meghan is being mistreated. Instead of you know, the people actually being mistreated - her kids?
The allegation came via third-party quote from a woman who'd seen video footage of prior custody exchanges and she described Jim as being rageful and frightening and putting thd kids in the middle of the conflict where Meghsb tried to shield them. Her organization is a watchdog for abusers. The organization is One Mom’s Battle.
Multiple posters made the same claims earlier in the thread. And you’ve lost the plot if you believe anything from One Mom’s Battle.
Of course, as a group of educated moms, we believe in One Mom's Battle and in the work they are doing to help children and mothers. You now sound like the problem.
She has an extreme bias and agenda and needs to keep that in everything she says and does as that is how she makes a living. Kind of skews her narrative when you can already predict exactly what she will say about each case.
+1 People need to stop being so gullible about this woman.
I know Tina Swithin and you and the other PP have not one single iota of a clue what you are talking about and you are simply dead wrong. But I know that won't mean a thing to you. You won't take the time to listen to or read her story (she herself is a child of divorce and she was raised by her *father* who she says was the healthier of her two parents), how she advocates for *childrens' rights* and supports *protective parents* (whether that is the mother or the father), and she also talks about the name "One Mom's Battle" and how she chose that name over 15 years ago when she started a little unknown blog at the time, documenting her own (as the mother, as in "one mom") battle and how that name doesn't fit anymore but it has become so synonymous with her advocacy platform that it would be too difficult to change.
You’d be wrong. Which is why you and others posting about One Mom and all these narcissistic rants are so incredibly dangerous.
You can keep trying to undermine with your unmitigated one-line BS responses with zero details or facts, it won't work.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:One Mom's Battle, which is a community activist organization that supports women who navigate post-separation abuse through a variety of resources, posted this:
"What is happening to Meghan King right now is a crisis I have watched play out again and again. It is a war on mothers and the same pattern I see in my messages every day.
She has lost custody of her children. He has temporary full custody. This is not entertainment or gossip. It is a window into a system stacked against protective mothers.
People keep saying, “Do you know what it takes for a mother to lose custody?”
I do. It is very easy and very common for mothers to lose custody.
The comments from people who know nothing about family court have been infuriating. I do not care if you like her or dislike her. What has happened to her is inhumane. The people rushing into the comments with fast opinions are often the least informed about the family court crisis.
Money plays a role. Influence plays a role. Families are targeted by professionals who profit from conflict.
Women are pushed to the brink and when we finally react like any human under prolonged stress, that reaction is used as proof against us. “See, she is crazy.” This is the trap. This is the setup. This is the pattern.
I will say this plainly. In my opinion, he is a raging egomaniac narcissist. I have viewed footage from one of their custody exchanges. His behavior was rageful and frightening. He placed the children in the conflict while she did everything possible to deescalate. I thought about that video for a long time. The fact that he now has full custody is deeply concerning.
But this is not only about them. This is what is happening to mothers across the world. When a mother tries to protect her children, she is punished for it. When she speaks up, she is labeled unstable. When she reacts to trauma, that reaction is weaponized and used to justify removing her children.
It is a crisis. It is real. It is happening in plain sight. It needs to be called what it is."
I get this, but the posts about the sick child are major red flags. Is that a reaction to extreme stress?
Anonymous wrote:I wonder if there was some kind of medical abuse / munchausen’s happening. The child she referred to as ‘severely disabled’ and who issues she posted about day and night. That is likely the child she was also self medicating. It will be interesting to see if once he is away from her if he still has all the same issues and if he is actually severely disabled.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:One Mom's Battle, which is a community activist organization that supports women who navigate post-separation abuse through a variety of resources, posted this:
"What is happening to Meghan King right now is a crisis I have watched play out again and again. It is a war on mothers and the same pattern I see in my messages every day.
She has lost custody of her children. He has temporary full custody. This is not entertainment or gossip. It is a window into a system stacked against protective mothers.
People keep saying, “Do you know what it takes for a mother to lose custody?”
I do. It is very easy and very common for mothers to lose custody.
The comments from people who know nothing about family court have been infuriating. I do not care if you like her or dislike her. What has happened to her is inhumane. The people rushing into the comments with fast opinions are often the least informed about the family court crisis.
Money plays a role. Influence plays a role. Families are targeted by professionals who profit from conflict.
Women are pushed to the brink and when we finally react like any human under prolonged stress, that reaction is used as proof against us. “See, she is crazy.” This is the trap. This is the setup. This is the pattern.
I will say this plainly. In my opinion, he is a raging egomaniac narcissist. I have viewed footage from one of their custody exchanges. His behavior was rageful and frightening. He placed the children in the conflict while she did everything possible to deescalate. I thought about that video for a long time. The fact that he now has full custody is deeply concerning.
But this is not only about them. This is what is happening to mothers across the world. When a mother tries to protect her children, she is punished for it. When she speaks up, she is labeled unstable. When she reacts to trauma, that reaction is weaponized and used to justify removing her children.
It is a crisis. It is real. It is happening in plain sight. It needs to be called what it is."
This. Absolutely this.
LOUDER, for the people in the back.
Anonymous wrote:One Mom's Battle, which is a community activist organization that supports women who navigate post-separation abuse through a variety of resources, posted this:
"What is happening to Meghan King right now is a crisis I have watched play out again and again. It is a war on mothers and the same pattern I see in my messages every day.
She has lost custody of her children. He has temporary full custody. This is not entertainment or gossip. It is a window into a system stacked against protective mothers.
People keep saying, “Do you know what it takes for a mother to lose custody?”
I do. It is very easy and very common for mothers to lose custody.
The comments from people who know nothing about family court have been infuriating. I do not care if you like her or dislike her. What has happened to her is inhumane. The people rushing into the comments with fast opinions are often the least informed about the family court crisis.
Money plays a role. Influence plays a role. Families are targeted by professionals who profit from conflict.
Women are pushed to the brink and when we finally react like any human under prolonged stress, that reaction is used as proof against us. “See, she is crazy.” This is the trap. This is the setup. This is the pattern.
I will say this plainly. In my opinion, he is a raging egomaniac narcissist. I have viewed footage from one of their custody exchanges. His behavior was rageful and frightening. He placed the children in the conflict while she did everything possible to deescalate. I thought about that video for a long time. The fact that he now has full custody is deeply concerning.
But this is not only about them. This is what is happening to mothers across the world. When a mother tries to protect her children, she is punished for it. When she speaks up, she is labeled unstable. When she reacts to trauma, that reaction is weaponized and used to justify removing her children.
It is a crisis. It is real. It is happening in plain sight. It needs to be called what it is."
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between defending someone and being cynical about what a rich and powerful man's PR team has leaked to the media and achieved through the family court system.
Then you would post as such instead of the screeds that have been posted on this thread about people just “knowing” Jim must be a narcissistic abuser manipulating the courts. All of these rants painting Meghan as a victim would be more factual rather than just “feelings” that poor Meghan is being mistreated. Instead of you know, the people actually being mistreated - her kids?
The allegation came via third-party quote from a woman who'd seen video footage of prior custody exchanges and she described Jim as being rageful and frightening and putting thd kids in the middle of the conflict where Meghsb tried to shield them. Her organization is a watchdog for abusers. The organization is One Mom’s Battle.
Multiple posters made the same claims earlier in the thread. And you’ve lost the plot if you believe anything from One Mom’s Battle.
Of course, as a group of educated moms, we believe in One Mom's Battle and in the work they are doing to help children and mothers. You now sound like the problem.
She has an extreme bias and agenda and needs to keep that in everything she says and does as that is how she makes a living. Kind of skews her narrative when you can already predict exactly what she will say about each case.
+1 People need to stop being so gullible about this woman.
I know Tina Swithin and you and the other PP have not one single iota of a clue what you are talking about and you are simply dead wrong. But I know that won't mean a thing to you. You won't take the time to listen to or read her story (she herself is a child of divorce and she was raised by her *father* who she says was the healthier of her two parents), how she advocates for *childrens' rights* and supports *protective parents* (whether that is the mother or the father), and she also talks about the name "One Mom's Battle" and how she chose that name over 15 years ago when she started a little unknown blog at the time, documenting her own (as the mother, as in "one mom") battle and how that name doesn't fit anymore but it has become so synonymous with her advocacy platform that it would be too difficult to change.
You’d be wrong. Which is why you and others posting about One Mom and all these narcissistic rants are so incredibly dangerous.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between defending someone and being cynical about what a rich and powerful man's PR team has leaked to the media and achieved through the family court system.
Then you would post as such instead of the screeds that have been posted on this thread about people just “knowing” Jim must be a narcissistic abuser manipulating the courts. All of these rants painting Meghan as a victim would be more factual rather than just “feelings” that poor Meghan is being mistreated. Instead of you know, the people actually being mistreated - her kids?
The allegation came via third-party quote from a woman who'd seen video footage of prior custody exchanges and she described Jim as being rageful and frightening and putting thd kids in the middle of the conflict where Meghsb tried to shield them. Her organization is a watchdog for abusers. The organization is One Mom’s Battle.
Multiple posters made the same claims earlier in the thread. And you’ve lost the plot if you believe anything from One Mom’s Battle.
Of course, as a group of educated moms, we believe in One Mom's Battle and in the work they are doing to help children and mothers. You now sound like the problem.
She has an extreme bias and agenda and needs to keep that in everything she says and does as that is how she makes a living. Kind of skews her narrative when you can already predict exactly what she will say about each case.
+1 People need to stop being so gullible about this woman.
I know Tina Swithin and you and the other PP have not one single iota of a clue what you are talking about and you are simply dead wrong. But I know that won't mean a thing to you. You won't take the time to listen to or read her story (she herself is a child of divorce and she was raised by her *father* who she says was the healthier of her two parents), how she advocates for *childrens' rights* and supports *protective parents* (whether that is the mother or the father), and she also talks about the name "One Mom's Battle" and how she chose that name over 15 years ago when she started a little unknown blog at the time, documenting her own (as the mother, as in "one mom") battle and how that name doesn't fit anymore but it has become so synonymous with her advocacy platform that it would be too difficult to change.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between defending someone and being cynical about what a rich and powerful man's PR team has leaked to the media and achieved through the family court system.
Then you would post as such instead of the screeds that have been posted on this thread about people just “knowing” Jim must be a narcissistic abuser manipulating the courts. All of these rants painting Meghan as a victim would be more factual rather than just “feelings” that poor Meghan is being mistreated. Instead of you know, the people actually being mistreated - her kids?
The allegation came via third-party quote from a woman who'd seen video footage of prior custody exchanges and she described Jim as being rageful and frightening and putting thd kids in the middle of the conflict where Meghsb tried to shield them. Her organization is a watchdog for abusers. The organization is One Mom’s Battle.
Multiple posters made the same claims earlier in the thread. And you’ve lost the plot if you believe anything from One Mom’s Battle.
Of course, as a group of educated moms, we believe in One Mom's Battle and in the work they are doing to help children and mothers. You now sound like the problem.
She has an extreme bias and agenda and needs to keep that in everything she says and does as that is how she makes a living. Kind of skews her narrative when you can already predict exactly what she will say about each case.
+1 People need to stop being so gullible about this woman.