top of page
POA 1.jpg

Power of Attorney for Female Induced Dementia

As an attorney, while arguning a case in the Court of Appeals, I insulted opposing counsel's argument.  The court loved my insult.  They published the case and my insult is now a law and "term of art" that lawyers must follow.  In another case I became frustrated at how a woman could use the legal  system to abuse men.  Sadly, the legal industry creates too much income from this institutional abuse, so no court will follow me here.  One day I was talking with a client about problems that his deceased father's third (gold digger) wife was causing and said, "When you dad wanted to marry this woman, someone should have just kicked his A$$"  - and the idea was born. 

We all know that many women have the power to turn off a man's brain and destroy his life.  Think of the movie "Casino".  Otherwise intelligent and brillian men will make insane decisions when under the influence of one of these women.  The courts are no help because the more problems that these women cause, the more money the legal industry makes.

I therefore imgined a practical "Power of Attorney" that a man could give to his friends so that they can save him when he eventually suffers from "Female Induced Dementia".  I have yet to meet a man who has not told me that it was "hilarious", "F'ing hilarious", or "the funniest thing I ever red.".  You will love it.  

Please download and enjoy.  Share it with friends.  

If you enjoy it, (which I am sure you will) do me a favor and show some support.  For the price of a nice greeting card, you can order an "Official Copy" that is "bluebacked" to look like an actual legal court document.  Share that with friends.  Buy a 5 pack andkeep a copy in your car, at home, and in your desk.  When your friend show s signs of "FID", give him an official copy. 

If like my POA, you will love my book, "The Empress has no clothes".  You can show support buy downloading a copy. (see below)


    We live in a world of the Emperor’s New Clothes.  In that story, a group of con artists tricked an Emperor into buying an imaginary suit of clothes.  The key to the scam was that anyone who did not see the clothing was deemed “unworthy” and would be removed from his position in society.  The scam depended upon convincing people that they were unworthy.  The Emperor, not wanting to appear unworthy, wore the “clothes” and paraded around the streets naked. He exchanged real clothing that protected his modesty and body for imaginary clothing that exposed him to degradation.

    This is our modern relationship paradigm.  In the 20th Century, like the conmen exchanging real fabric for imaginary, governments changed marriage/relationship laws that exchanged real benefits and legal protections for imaginary and unenforceable benefits.  Like the conmen using the words “suit”, “fabric” and “clothes” we still use words such as “commitment” but like with the story, this “commitment” in illusory.  We still use the word “marriage”, but the definition is so radically different that it has no more in common with historic marriage than the Emperor’s new clothes with his historic clothes.

    Like with the conmen, the key to this fraud is to make men feel unworthy of women and to make women believe that they have magical powers to make a man’s life better by merely allowing him to be in her presence.  This is a paradigm of destruction.  Men suffer, children suffer, and eventually women suffer (when their illusion comes crashing down). The only people who benefit are those criminals (industries that profit from destruction) who sold us the paradigm.

    Men are catching on to the fraud and avoiding it in ever greater numbers.  In furtherance of the scam, the criminals now blame and shame men for being “too weak” to “commit” as men throughout history have done.  They hide the reality that marriage is a contract.  It is legally defined as a contract and always has been a contract.  A contract is an agreement to trade.  Historically men and women traded what they had for what they needed.  Both benefited.  We are now taught that the historic trade was “abuse” and women should therefore not be held accountable.  We are mystified that in the 20th Century the divorce rate went from 1-2% to 10%, then to over 50%.  We are not told that these jumps immediately followed changes in the law.  We are instead told the “people” (men) are now too weak to “commit” and men must be stronger.  But what would happen to the car industry if they instituted a “No Fault Car Loan”.  Imagine a car company could repossess your car at any time, for any reason, keep the money you paid and legally force you to continue making payments. You wouldn’t buy a car.  Only fools would buy cars on credit and the industry would collapse.  Yet, society fails to see this simple economic reality regarding marriage and “committed relationships”.

    I was trained as an Economist and Lawyer, so instead of looking at relationships from a psychological or emotional perspective and analyzing the differences between men and women, I look at the common humanity of man.  What motivates a person to constructive, or destructive behavior?  How do laws and informal social reward and punish systems motivate people to constructive or destructive behavior.

    When we look at relationships from this perspective, we see that the men who reject modern “committed” relationships are not one more step in the destruction of society.  They are nature’s cure for an unnatural destructive paradigm.

    bottom of page