Glenn Sacks Gets Served by Domestic Violence Survivor

UPDATED!! 2/15

Jennifer Collins has done a great write-up on the "father's right's" coward, Glenn Sacks, that has continuously vilified her mother, Holly Collins. Holly Collins fled to the Netherlands with her children after the Hennepin County Minnesota family court system awarded child custody to a man who abused them all. Glenn Sacks accuses the mom of fabricating the abuse and continues his vengeful attack on Holly's grown daughter, Jennifer. He insists that Jennifer is suffering from parental alienation syndrome (although "psych" "diagnoses" cannot be made without a "professional" interviewing and evaluating all parties) and lying about the past abuse.

Read Jennifer's two-part piece:

The Real Glenn Sacks


College Student Jennifer Collins Exposes the Real Glen Sacks

If you are unfamiliar the the entire ordeal, it would help if you read some of the other posts she has done in which she describes how Glenn Sacks has assaulted her family.

I can only admire the courage Jennifer has continue to exhibit in battling this coward and his minions. Many have told her to stop, because he will cause her more harm, but I can understand that when someone just lies so damn much, you can't help but to defend yourself. Glenn Sacks is a bully and most people don't stand up to bullies. But this isn't grade school.

After reading both of Jennifer's pieces, the conclusion I have come to is that Glenn Sacks has very poor self-esteem and resulting extreme projection issues. I mean, it's really, really bad. So bad that I wonder if secretly he believes all these bad things about know, deep, deep, down inside. He must know, deep, deep down inside, that all of the men that flock to him can't possibly all be falsely accused, or "robbed" of their parental relationships.

For now, I'm going to jump on the train of pscyhoanalyzation...shit, everyone else does it!

Glenn Sacks is indeed a bully. From WebMD:
(emphasis mine)
Children who bully:

* May witness physical and verbal violence or aggression at home. They have a positive view of this behavior, and they act aggressively toward other people, including adults.
* May hit or push other children.
* Are often physically strong.
* May or may not be popular with other children around their same age.
* Have trouble following rules.
* Show little concern for the feelings of others.

Many bullies think highly of themselves. They like being looked up to. And they often expect everyone to behave according to their wishes. Children who bully are often not taught to think about how their actions make other people feel.

I utilize the child bully article because Glenn Sacks' behavior is really childlike. I can imagine him sitting at home searching for misandry with a magnifying glass, with his arms crossed in front of his chest and his bottom lip poked out. My thought is that his bullying behavior prevents him from other destructive behaviors like drug abuse or alcoholism.

But here's a piece on adult bullying. Wait, there are waaaay too many characteristics! Let's just pick out the best:

(emphasis mine)

  • is a convincing, practised liar and when called to account, will make up anything spontaneously to fit their needs at that moment
  • has a Jekyll and Hyde nature - is vile, vicious and vindictive in private, but innocent and charming in front of witnesses; no-one can (or wants to) believe this individual has a vindictive nature - only the current target of the serial bully's aggression sees both sides; whilst the Jekyll side is described as "charming" and convincing enough to deceive personnel, management and a tribunal, the Hyde side is frequently described as "evil"; Hyde is the real person, Jekyll is an act
  • excels at deception and should never be underestimated in their capacity to deceive
  • uses excessive charm and is always plausible and convincing when peers, superiors or others are present (charm can be used to deceive as well as to cover for lack of empathy)
  • is glib, shallow and superficial with plenty of fine words and lots of form - but there's no substance
  • is possessed of an exceptional verbal facility and will outmanoeuvre most people in verbal interaction, especially at times of conflict
  • relies on mimicry, repetition and regurgitation to convince others that he or she is both a "normal" human being and a tough dynamic manager, as in extolling the virtues of the latest management fads and pouring forth the accompanying jargon
  • is unusually skilled in being able to anticipate what people want to hear and then saying it plausibly
  • is emotionally retarded with an arrested level of emotional development; whilst language and intellect may appear to be that of an adult, the bully displays the emotional age of a five-year-old
  • is emotionally immature and emotionally untrustworthy
  • exhibits unusual and inappropriate attitudes to sexual matters, sexual behaviour and bodily functions; underneath the charming exterior there are often suspicions or hints of sex discrimination and sexual harassment, perhaps also sexual dysfunction, sexual inadequacy, sexual perversion, sexual violence or sexual abuse
  • is self-opinionated and displays arrogance, audacity, a superior sense of entitlement and sense of invulnerability and untouchability
  • is a control freak and has a compulsive need to control everyone and everything you say, do, think and believe; for example, will launch an immediate personal attack attempting to restrict what you are permitted to say if you start talking knowledgeably about psychopathic personality or antisocial personality disorder in their presence - but aggressively maintains the right to talk (usually unknowledgeably) about anything they choose; serial bullies despise anyone who enables others to see through their deception and their mask of sanity
  • undermines and destroys anyone who the bully perceives to be an adversary, a potential threat, or who can see through the bully's mask
  • may pursue a vindictive vendetta against anyone who dares to held them accountable, perhaps using others' resources and contemptuous of the damage caused to other people and organisations in pursuance of the vendetta
  • is also quick to belittle, undermine, denigrate and discredit anyone who calls, attempts to call, or might call the bully to account

Was that enough?

I have separated the last few because I think they so perfectly fit in with Glenn Sacks and his role in the fathers' and men's right movement and the movement at large.
  • poisons peoples' minds by manipulating their perceptions
  • is arrogant, haughty, high-handed, and a know-all
  • often has an overwhelming, unhealthy and narcissistic attention-seeking need to portray themselves as a wonderful, kind, caring and compassionate person, in contrast to their behaviour and treatment of others; the bully sees nothing wrong with their behavior and chooses to remain oblivious to the discrepancy between how they like to be seen and how they are seen by others
  • is constantly imposing on others a false reality made up of distortion and fabrication

Now I'm going to borrow some of the Glenn Sacks quotes that Jennifer displayed:

“I told my dad that I thought he lived a pathetic existence and I did not understand why he had much will to live at all.”
Isn't it true that some people just love to work and in fact, are workaholics? Or maybe they just love money? Or maybe they love being providers? And if given the choice between working outside the home and perhaps being a homemaker, they would still choose the former? Why not respect that instead of the suicidal implications? People do not have the same desires or values.
“The only credit left for men is the military, and even this has been partially hijacked. We now speak of ‘the men and women who fought and died in our wars’ as if even one percent of our military casualties were ever suffered by women, or as if women were ever conscripted the way men were.”
Hijacked? Rather dramatic. No one said the deaths were equal but it would be correct to acknowledge that men and women die in the military...and they don't always have to be in combat. Is that so painful to admit?
“While it's easy and popular to blame men, many of the wounds women bear from failed relationships and loneliness are self-inflicted.”
There is enough blame to share. But a harsh reality that Sacks, and others like him, don't acknowledge (on purpose) is that a lot of this can be attributed not to fatherlessness, but to childhood sexual abuse or family violence in general (ask some real psychologists/psychiatrists who are fortunate to know their patients' entire histories). If abuse is a child's first intimate experience, it would stand to reason that there may be complications with adult intimate relationships.
"Fathers need to start parenting the way they want to parent. When they do there's no guarantee that the mother will go along with it, and that can cause problems, but men need to stop waiting for their wives' approval."
Hold up. This is a major red flag. I thought parenting in a relationship was a joint venture? If you want to have it your way, you should remain single and try adoption.
“Most marital problems and marriage counseling sessions revolve around why the wife is unhappy with her husband,”
There is a good damn reason for this: It is typically the women who profess to be unhappy, and the men who still don't have a clue for some reason. Also, women are the ones who initiate counseling with the desire to improve the marital relationship. It is a good sign because she cares enough (or maybe bad sign because she still wants to hold on).
“People in general seem convinced that stay-at-home moms get a raw deal and work much harder than breadwinner dads… Having been a stay-at-home dad with two kids during the years when they need the most intensive care, I can tell you that this is nonsense.”
This one was hilarious. First, no two stay at home parents do the exact same thing in a day, parent the same, have the same responsibilities, it is completely unfair to make this generalization. There are some stay at homes whose kids are gone for the school day, and then have extra-curricular activities...perhaps the kids are independent and there is no need for parental help with school work. Too many variations. And sometimes it really isn't about the kids, wholly, but the totality of what is to be accomplished, or expected to accomplished, for the entire family.
"I can't eliminate ... rap music that trashes women. So I choose the battles I can win, and go from there."
The old misogynistic rap music argument used by White men...except they somehow fail to realize how it is evidence of misogyny, in general, that is endemic in our society. Black men don't trash Black women in a vacuum. Read some bell hooks. But the father's rights movement makes sure to target Black men into their hate camp without addressing Black issues at large. Works out quite nicely, doesn't it? (see Father's Rights Co-opting of Issues that Affect Families of Color)
“Success in school is tightly correlated with the ability to sit still, be quiet, and complete work which is presented in a dull, assembly-line fashion… the methods and structure they employ are not suited to our sons' needs.”
It doesn't fit many children's needs...boys and girls. However, seems that with all the complaining Sacks does, he'd just homeschool his son, especially since being a stay at home is so simple.
“Many of our boys will have spent much of the day being scolded and punished, often for doing nothing more than being boys… each of these mistreated little boys…Everyone always says girls in school suffer; they have low self-esteem; teachers make them feel second best, blah blah blah… But it's obvious that, in general, girls are doing better in school, and boys are falling behind."
Consider for a moment that boys may be suffering in our public school system because of the rigid gender roles that society, and their fathers parents, confine them to. Boys may want to be teachers, daycare providers, seamstresses, etc, but maybe they are limited by what people think they should be. Feminism has opened up the realm for women to not only dream of being, but to be. Maybe that's why girls are excelling. But the folks in the fatherhood camps are always try to throw men back with the reclaiming of masculinity and other bullshit (note the number of times they talk about "emasculation"). The next part is a nice display:
"we've made a lot of fathers into wimps--not only have many fathers been driven out of their kids lives by the family courts, not only do we have many women deciding to have kids on their own, but the fathers who are in the home have become a lot weaker because we've made the idea of a strong father into a bad thing."
Wimps? And is this true, or have we made putting up with an abusive, drunk, cheating, assholish father a bad thing?

Thank you Jennifer for doing the research and continuing to be strong. You are a survivor.

I'd like to end with a clip to lighten things up a bit:

The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Male Inequality
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Political Humor

Thought I was done. I want to include some lucid thoughts from an online divorce forum:

(emphasis mine)
That statement is the only REAL thing that exhists in Family Law Court. Don't contact Glenn S.u.c.k.s., excuse me, Sacks, for he and his group Fathers and Families are the REAL reason the Family Law Courts are out of control.

This child was hurt because the system failed, not because the "mother" was diabolical. Glenn and his rabbid pack of dogs have been funding court corruption and there is plenty of proof. While they think they are getting the upper hand in Courtrooms all over the country, the only thing that is progressing is the just how much money the Judges, and all the corrupt players they appoint are now getting.

You are supporting the corruption. Shame on you. This isn't happening because of women's groups. This is happening because of greed. Glenn S u c k s is not an expert, although, he is making money hand over fist, leading disturbed men astray, speaking and changing laws that were designed to protect children from abuse. He himself decided that NO child needs to be protected from abuse, be it abuse of a mother, or a father. He supports "alienation" theorys, which means that no child will be protected. Open the door and they all come flooding in, with excuse after excuse to drag court cases out for years, while the children are emotionally raped, and the parents are financially raped. Today the hot button is alienation, and tomorrow it will be something else. Stop supporting people that make excuses, solely for profit, which Glenn and all the other's have done.

And another thing for Glenn to realize, by the age of three or four, children have either bonded or not to the parent. A court order isnt going to make them love you, respect you, or even want to be around you. It's the ego's of these parents that get in the way, of what the child needs.

I was a long time supporter of Glenn, but once I found out about the funding, the corruption, and his own selfish goals, it became clear to me, he is just one more person, looking to profit.

Research Justice4Fathers, the leader of that group (the origional group) abandon ship, once he saw just how far some men will go to "Win". This isn't a game. Children's lives are at stake. You have no idea what is really going on behind the scene, and to blame women for this, you are dead wrong.

There are far more "groups" of men, who program them into thinking that if they use the system, they will get custody. They have stopped thinking about the children and their best interests. You want to read an article...

Father's rights, Mother's rights...Enough is enough. You all are forgetting that children have rights. If you don't treat your children right, they will hate you. If you force them to be with you for the small amount of time until they become adults, and they just don't want to be with you, they will hate you for the rest of their lives. This is not a game. The mother for this child, may have played the game, but she lost now didn't she? Father's will loose too, because they have made and funded a new war.

I agree. There is no protection for abused children in Family Law Courts. The origional post from the child unfortunately happened many years ago. Now things are different, and if you are a protective parent, like the poster #2, you will never be able to protect a child from abuse. Father or Mother, the courts will give custody to the parent who is abusing the child, only to profit. If the courts would listen to the children, the cases would move quickly, and the children's lives wouldn't be destroyed. BUT, to ignore child safety, the courts know that the protective parent, Father or Mother, will keep expecting truth and justice to prevai, guaranteeing many years of money rolling into the courts. I also agree about Glenn's group. He has lost sight of the real issues. He is jaded by financial gain, much as anyone who pits profit over protection. Why some parents feel that they have the "right" to abuse their children, is beyond me. Just look at the numerous different posts for Judges in Family Law, and they are all the same. People complaining that the Judges are corrupt, that the child is in danger and no one is presenting the evidence that one of the parents is abusive, or the courts will just ignore it. We need a reality check here in America. People are out of control, and there are parents abusing their children everywhere. Mr. Sacks seems to think that this is a falsehood, and only used by mother's. Then I have to ask, why are children dying at the hands of the parent? Why is there such a rise in Familicides? We see only a mere fraction of murders on t.v. because the reality is too harsh. People would rather ban together and save the polar bears.
and finally:
Wake up Grandma, that is the biggest load of c r a p. That is exactally what Glenn Sacks and Fathers rights groups want the world to think, ONLY for the purpose of making money. Glenn is not doing this for any other reason than to profit, and all those parents that support him or groups like his, are being manipulated.

Good father's, concerned father's, protective father's like post 2, don't have custody, BECAUSE they are trying to PROTECT A CHILD FROM ABUSE.

BUT that is no different from the thousands of protective mothers that are losing custody daily. You need to research, before you jump on the band waggon. Glenn's group has made ANY parent looking to say "MY CHILD IS BEING ABUSED" a liar. FATHER OR MOTHER. Therefore, the child will be placed with the abuser, so the court and their cohorts can profit. So can Glenn. Any parent can say, "alienation" to get away with abuse, and the courts say, "cool, we can run this case into the ground now".

You said it before, your ex daughter in law is abusive, and sounds like your son doesn't have custody. The reality for any protective parent, is that there is NO protection any more. The lies are a profit center.


Courts are being paid by Father's rights groups, by minors counsels and others favorite appointees' to give custody to the abuser.
THAT'S IT. Period.

This has nothing to do with reuniting children with their fathers. It has nothing to do with getting to the bottom of an abuse allegation. This has nothing to do with truth and justice.