Happy Sperm Donor’s Day
The next day, Princess Tasha responded to the most outlandish insults, neglected the valid criticism and stereotyped fathers as angry and not interested in the rights of children.
I think it’s fair comment to speculate on the potential reasons for this piece of incompetent journalism.
Let’s review the facts:
1. Princess Tasha did not bother to reference the sources of her research and made outlandish and unsupported claims of “a lot of damage”
2. After a great deal of criticism, Princess Tasha added links to some biased research that criticizes some of the custody problems in Australia. Valid criticism, yet incomplete and one-sided.
3. Princess Tasha didn’t even bother to review the more extensive and complete Australian research.
4. Princess Tasha didn’t even bother to review any Canadian research
5. Princess Tasha ignored all of the valid criticism and focused entirely on the most extreme and outlandish insults.
6. Princess Tasha stereotyped fathers who support this bill as angry and insinuated that they are not concerned about children’s rights.
7. Princess Tasha did some Canadian research, which included getting comments from Ian and a few of her friends (Lawyers and mommy bloggers)
8. After Maurice Vellacott’s response to Princess Tasha’s article was posted, all comments on Princess Tasha’s article were deleted
9. Only after criticism of the NP were the comments re-instated.
In summary, Princess Tasha neglected to research the most extensive and complete Australian Study and also neglected to do any Canadian research and get comments from any Canadian source, including the Maurice Vellacott, whose bill she is criticizing.
Apparently, Princess Tasha can’t read! To add insult to injury, the NP attempted to shut down debate.
The Radical Feminists,Ignorant Grannies and Old Fashioned Chauvenists are in agreement with Princess Tasha’s assertion of Feminine Privilege. Yet, Part 3 should be an apology to the readers of the NP and all Canadians who deserve better quality journalism.