Fathers4Justice launch silly attack on Mumsnet


1:45 pm - March 16th 2012

by Sunny Hundal    


      Share on Tumblr

The group Fathers4Justice (yes they’re back!) have launched this ad – which the iPaper has taken on today.

It obviously looks like a publicity stunt – they say they plan to boycott M&S for advertising with Mumsnet.

But if you were M&S and had to pick a side between a massive website aimed at mothers and some angry dads – what would you do? No brainer.

And is Mumsnet really enemy number one? How absurd.

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: News

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


Welcome to the thrilling world of Mens Rights Activism, where anything not specifically tailored to the white male demographic is a hideous attack from the evil misandrist gynocracy.

They are ridiculously wide of the mark here. Campaigning for a better representation of fathers when it comes to child custody is one thing, and I sympatise there, but this is just stupid, helps no-one, and actively hurts their cause.

I like Mumsnet: they are popular for a reason, offering sound advice with wit and warmth. And I’m a dad.

Looks ridiculous to me. Does Mumsnet promote “gender hatred” against anyone? I doubt it. You don’t seem to have done any investigating to find out if there’s any truth in Fathers4Justice’s complaints, Sunny. Maybe they’re so ridiculous that they’re not worth checking out?

I don’t think it matters so much whether they can win this fight or not. In a situation where there really was injustice taking place, you surely wouldn’t say that nobody should protest against it if they were outnumbered and unlikely to win?

4. Chaise Guevara

Can you post the text in the ad so we know what the campaign is actually about?

We’ll never know if there’s any justification to this because it’s far too easy to ignore misandry in our culture right now. Even suggesting misandry gets flame comments like Kieran’s.

If people are going to complain about misandry – then engage the brain or you’ll get laughed out. It’s really no different to people who complain about other forms of discrimination (if the complaint is ridiculous).

Chaise – it links to a bigger version, though I couldn’t find anything too big online.

7. Chaise Guevara

@ 6 Sunny

Thanks, hadn’t noticed the link. From a quick glance, I suspect they’re blaming Mumsnet for a small amount of objectionable comments on its forums (what with the complaint of offensive “content” and demanding a “zero tolerance” approach). If so, yes, that’s misguided.

The irony is that pretty much all the shit that gets dumped on fathers is directly linked to patriarchy and that systems ideas about fixed gender roles. Reason why mothers usually win child-custody cases?
Because mothers are child carers and fathers breadwinners.

I believe it falls under ‘patriarchy hurts men too, but it hurts women more’.

They say it’s misandrous to call a man a wife-beater or paedophile. They *don’t* seem to be saying it’s misandrous to call a man a wife-beater or paedophile *unless* he beats his wife or has sex with minors. Maybe they thought that bit went without saying, I don’t know.

In the spirit of inquiry, I went to Mumsnet and looked round. The only thing I saw that vaguely fitted Fathers4Justice’s claims is that their rape-awareness campaign is called “We Believe You”, which, if you squint and try really hard, I suppose *could* be intereprated as saying all men are rapists.

10. Rick Tanner

Just wondered how we know this is an official Fathers 4 Justice ad? It gets no mention at all on their website. Might it actually be from one of the splinter organizations (“Real Fathers 4 Justice” or “New Fathers 4 Justice”). Or even from someone trying to discredit Fathers 4 Justice?

Clearly you have not been at the receiving end of the family court system, especially from the male perspective. Mumsnet for all its initial good intentions has a nasty underlying thread running through it. Some mums on there are actively seeking advice upon how to exclude the father of their child / children, and Mumsnet are actively encouraging it. If there was a site actively targeting, Indians, Blacks, Muslims, gays etc and backed by a large corporation what would you do? The answers not so simple now is it? Yes we have proof.

I am a proud member of F4J. Had the authorities from Cafcass, Contact Centers, Courts, Social services treated me fairly from the start there would be no need for the likes of F4J.

My case is over, for the most part, but I will never stand by and watch them do this to my son or daughter.

Look behind the spin, we’re not just picking a fight for the sake of it, If you take the time to ask questions, do some research, you’ll realize that there are some serious injustices going on that need radical changes. If you are at all interested give me a call. But I would suggest you all take some history lessons, 90% of the rights and privileges we enjoy today were fought for. Kings, Queens, Men and women have died for.

M&S like News of the World protest-eth to much, I wonder mmmmm

Open your eyes before you open your mouths

Oh dear. You are all very quick to judge the advert without bothering to find out why there is a need for it.

http://quantumvaleat.wordpress.com/2012/03/12/much-ado-about-mumsnet/

This blog entry gives you more details.

@ Mark – great post!

I’m confused. What is their problem with Mumsnet?

A group for mothers… but they are a group for fathers.

Eh?

15. Mothers4Justice

It’s interesting how these men think women standing up for the rights of women and little girls who have been sexually abused, raped, beaten, starved, tortured, enslaved, oppressed and even murdered are ‘man haters.’ They’re not. They’re talking about the men who *do* commit these terrible atrocities against women and female children. They’re not talking about all men or pointing their finger at all men and claiming them as all being guilty as each other.

If you’ve never been violent, sexually abusive or controlling towards women and female children then why get angry or feel persecuted when women talk about those who do? I find it odd.

I think this is just a nasty publicity stunt from a deeply vile group of people (have we all forgotten their attempt at baby kidnapping?) that everyone thought had bitten the dust ages ago. This is offensive and hurtful to all Mothers, especially those who have Sons. Someone please tell me when Mums.net have put a similar advert out near Father’s day?

Sorry, but Fathers have more rights today than Mothers did for thousands of years where they didn’t get a single solitary say in the lives of the children they carried for 9 months, they went through agony and suffering giving birth to over a course of hours or days and who they had cared for since birth. Custody will always go to the main care giver, who more often than not was the Mother, because they are the ones who put in all the work, went through all the sleep deprivation and exhaustion. Sorry, but that is fair.

I wonder if Fathers4Justice would complain about custody if it was them who had gone through 9 months pregnancy, hours or days of agony & suffering in childbirth and all the sleep deprivation and exhaution of looking after the baby?

No? Thought not.

Custody is always awarded to the main care giver. More often than not, that is the Mother. How many of the Fathers in ‘Fathers4Justice’ put in the 24 hour nappy changing and feeding etc., every day? Not many, I bet.

So small, unimportant campaign group wastes energy attacking quite large, undirected (despite what some think) relatively unimportant website?

Presumably some overweight superheros are even now waiting to swoop in on a Mumsnet forum somewhere?

17. Mothers4Justice

It’s interesting how these men think women standing up for the rights of women and little girls who have been sexually abused, raped, beaten, starved, tortured, enslaved, oppressed and even murdered are ‘man haters.’ They’re not. They’re talking about the men who *do* commit these terrible atrocities against women and female children. They’re not talking about all men or pointing their finger at all men and claiming them as all being guilty as each other.

If you’ve never been violent, sexually abusive or controlling towards women and female children then why get angry or feel persecuted when women talk about those who do? I find it odd.

I think this is just a nasty publicity stunt from a deeply vile group of people (have we all forgotten their attempt at baby kidnapping?) that everyone thought had bitten the dust ages ago. This is offensive and hurtful to all Mothers, especially those who have Sons. Someone please tell me when Mums.net have put a similar advert out near Father’s day?

Sorry, but Fathers have more rights today than Mothers did for thousands of years where they didn’t get a single solitary say in the lives of the children they carried for 9 months, they went through agony and suffering giving birth to over a course of hours or days and who they had cared for since birth. Custody will always go to the main care giver, who more often than not was the Mother, because they are the ones who put in all the work, went through all the sleep deprivation and exhaustion. Sorry, but that is fair.

I wonder if Fathers4Justice would complain about custody if it was them who had gone through 9 months pregnancy, hours or days of agony & suffering in childbirth and all the sleep deprivation and exhaution of looking after the baby?

No? Thought not.

Custody is always awarded to the main care giver. Mire often than not, that is the Mother. How many of the Fathers in ‘Fathers4Justice’ put in the 24 hour nappy changing and feeding etc., every day? Not many, I bet.

I have to say, that blog, which I tried to read with an open mind basically seemed to say some posters on Mumsnet wrote nasty hateful things about men? It’s the internet? Did any actual organisers or anyone “official” say such things?

Have you ever read a rape thread on Comment in Free? Or looked at the comments about women, gays, or Muslims on, well, any Daily Telegraph article? Are you protesting every organisation that advertises with the Telegraph, Spectator, or Guardian?

And then the blog says

“Voltaire once wrote :I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it. obviously Voltaire didn’t write this over the past week – he may well have taken a different stance if he had. ”

Er… I am pretty sure he took into account the possibility of people calling men nasty names when he said it. He was a fairly smart guy ;)

By the time I got to the bit where “Do me a favour love” I had already given up.

For the uneducated, this is an a typical scenario, I’ll break it down so you can all keep up.
We are not fighting to protect wife beaters, pedophiles, rapist, and the like.
Who would?

We do not want to be prejudged as that on separation and before we enter a court room.

No more than assuming that every woman acted like Baby P’s mother.
Clearly that would be unfair wouldn’t it?

So picture the scene.
So man and woman have a child.
Man and woman separate.
Man would like to carry on his fatherly role.
Woman says no.
Man has to then go to court for help.
Woman doesn’t like the man for going to court. And after some legal advice and advice from the likes of MUMSNET, screams rape, domestic violence, controlling.
Automatically and without proof man is removed from child and child from man. The mans family, the mans parents, the mans friends.

From 2 to15 years pass until the court realizes that the events never too place.
Court orders contact to resume.
Woman ignores the court order.
Nothing happens.
Some women have even moved so far away that contact can not practically resume.
Nothing happens.
Some women even concoct and conspire scenarios in order to alienate the man.

Men have been put in the cells for a weekend for writing birthday cards (Harassment they call it)

What right does that woman have over man or vice verse?

@ Mothers 4 Justice.
I do not condone violence of any kind, all of the crimes you mentioned should be dealt with in a criminal court and would strongly advise all your followers to contact the authorities if appropriate.

However to raise these issues as a way of achieving lone parenting rights is wrong. And it is this wrong we wish to put right.
If we had an equal / level playing field from the outset, it would alleviate a lot of pain and resentment

I loved watching my to children grow from seed to child to adult. The mother and I fell out of love. I never stopped loving my kids though. Women complain about controlling, when it is typically they who wish to control who their children love.

Fathers 4 Justice that’s it. Fathers want equal justice, not more, not less, the same.

As a subject of a false and malicious claim of abuse by my ex (I was exonerated by the courts after months of investigation) I cannot agree that this is bizarre or unwarranted.

And I do agree with everything Mark said.

F4J members, do you campaign for equal parental leave and equal pay for men and women? Because that’s where all this starts.

The system of parental leave is unfair – for everyone. If you want the family courts to see men as caregivers not breadwinners, start with writing to your MP asking for a Scandinavian type model of parental leave, where the time off is interchangeable between parents.

Or maybe when your ex partners got pregnant you felt you couldn’t be the ones to take time off work anyway because your salaries were so much better than theirs. Time to start campaigning against the gender pay gap I guess.

Or perhaps you were only too happy at the time to take advantage of these inequalities and let your ex partners take all the time off and do all the yucky monotonous parts of childcare while you continued to enjoy an unfettered upward career path and all the nice relaxing parts of parenthood on the side. And now the same inequality has turned round and bitten you in the backside. Tough breaks.

Sunny, will you openly promise to delete misandrist posts the same way as you treat misogynist ones please, Sexim is wrong weather it is aimed at women or men. thanks.

24. Chaise Guevara

@ Andy

“As a subject of a false and malicious claim of abuse by my ex (I was exonerated by the courts after months of investigation) I cannot agree that this is bizarre or unwarranted.”

But this campaign isn’t against false claims, it’s against Mumsnet. And the reasoning seems spurious: as far as I can tell, Mumsnet isn’t being attacked for its official position on anything, it’s being attacked for not somehow managing to delete every single comment on a ginormous forum that might offend a F4J member (even if doing so would be appropriate).

Which is a bit like attacking Sunny for “furthering right-wing views” simply because he doesn’t delete every commenter who disagrees with his site.

“Voltaire once wrote :I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it. obviously Voltaire didn’t write this over the past week…

Or, indeed, at all. Evelyn Beatrice Hall wrote it.

This post on facebook sums up their reason for the campaign:

Athene Wherrett: This isn’t just an attention seeking publicity stunt, this is a F4J attention seeking publicity stunt.

Matt Ball Indeed it is. We are seeking attention to the subject matter not the organisation.. If people spent half the energy helping to lobby for change than they do bashing F4J on just ill-informed opinion then there would be no need for F4J – It would simply cease to exist – No one would be more happy about that than its own members.

@ Chaise Guevara Well said!

Dear Sunny. Your comment really shows your ignorance and lack of knowledge as to whats really going on here. Your taking for granted that most would make a decision in favour of mums, “taking sides” (as you so poorly put it) between “angry fathers” (again a misinformed and poorly put remark) and between mums is “a no brainer”, really shows that you have preconceived and biased ideas as to the issues. Mumsnet is not really concerned with the real welfare of children, this becomes obvious when you read the vitriol and poisen that they promote against anyone that happens to be maleThe idea that such a serious and major issue of fathers wanting to see the ones they love being brought down to the level of your remark, “taking sides”, is really despicable not to say missing the point by miles. Have you ever tried to actually empathise with those so called “angry fathers”, what is it that makes them angry, why do you conclude that they are indeed angry? Yes some of us are angry, anger is not always a bad thing. I get angry when I see kids being starved to death and suffering because of the selfishness of governments, that kind of anger is good I think. Our anger is similair to this, when you know in your heart that there is no genuine reason as to why your ex is preventing you from seeing your kids, except for vengeance and some misguided sense of getting even, hang what the child wants! Your remarks only divide and promote the taking of sides, what a childish and fatuous remark to make! Fathers are only on the side of the child, we want to give them what they yearn for, and that is their dads back! The conspiracy you promote is not helpful to children. The anti father stance from mumsnet is plain for all to see, it has made its aims clear and that is to suggest that most fathers are potential rapists and child abusers and as such they have no right to see the ones they love. I have proved it to myself what they stand for, after many months of research and reading every comment on that sorry site. I am not quick to judge, but ive seen enough to make my mind up, they promote division and hatred. Therefore,the campaign against M&S, by F4J, is accurate and exposes that hatred for what it really is, a group of nazi extreme femanistoes that care little for the righst of children who are screaming out to see thier dads, This is the truth, I congratulate Matt O’conner for his bravery and his skills in what he is trying to do, and that is to get idiots like you to open your eyes to what’s going on in the secret family courts and the anti father stance of the haters at Mumsnet.

Ok, for a moment, imagine you have a child, your relationship breaks down and the Mother decides to stop you from having contact . Now, go and find out what you need to do to gain access. Let me know how you find that little search…

I didn’t believe it was that hard for Fathers, that most just didn’t care. But as a teacher I needed to be aware of the rights and responsibilities of parents so that all safeguarding procedures are followed correctly. I was shocked and appalled at what I discovered.
All men out there.. please, please make sure you are on the birth certificate, whatever happens. Otherwise your child is likely to have a fatherless life if the worst happens and yourself and your partner break up.

In regards to the M&S campaign, Mumsnet has many woman making sweeping generalisation about men. It also has posters/bloggers who have been giving tips and advice to enable Mothers to keep Fathers out of their children’s life -just because they don’t like them any more. Not only that but they have started to make hate filled comments against the women who support the rights of children.
F4J have every right to campaign against this. The group have worked hard to show that children have an equal right to both parents.

@Mothers4Justice, it doesn’t matter who carried the child for 9 months, the child doesn’t decide that! To think one parent has more right than the other due to that is absurd, it’s not about parents rights, it’s about the child’s rights. They have a right to BOTH parents. Stop thinking that one gender deserves one thing and the other deserves something else, neither parent deserves anything! They have a duty and responsibility to the child they create and it’s every child that deserves a Mother and Father.

Finally, if F4J started posting bigoted hate filled messages about women they would be shut down sharpish. These double standards need to stop. However F4J, from what I have seen, do not post hate or bigotry, the preach equality and justice. What is it they say? “Never hate your ex more than you love your children.” -good advice I’d say, after seeing hundreds of children in my school negatively effected by feuding parents who need to stop what they are doing and put the child first.

I do think theis F4J campaign is about the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen.

As far as I can tell, having pieced together various blogs, tweets, FB messages etc, the chronology was this:

1/ Some Mumsnetters on FB took a dislike to a previous F4J campaign, which showed little girls with duct tape across their faces, which some saw as misogynist & offensive.

2/ There was a flame war between F4J & Mumsnet group members on Facebook, subsequently deleted.

3/ A thread about it opened on Mumsnet website, which was invaded by F4J supporters, their comments are mostly now deleted but I’m guessing not especially polite.

4/ Mumsnetters reacted to the F4J invaders pretty strongly, including posting some genuinely nasty and hateful allegations and *shock* some swearwords. Someone described female F4J supporters as ‘handmaidens’ – which it seems is the most offensive word EVER used in the whole history of the Internetz EVER EVER EVER.

5/ F4J got huffy that they’d basically been out-trolled, announced on the site they would be reporting Mumsnet for hate speech, and began this campaign against their advertisers.

In other words, the whole thing is just a bogstandard flame-war, of the type that is played out across the internet day in day out.

But to my knowledge, no other flame war has ever ended up with national newspaper adverts as a result.

There really should be some international award for ridiculous over-reaction of the year.

@ Louise. Well said.

Little girls with duct tape across their faces? None of them were ‘little girls’ and all were young adults of whom were separated from their fathers by the family courts, who decided to tell their story.

I think handmaidens is pretty offensive, have a read of A handmaid Tale by Margaret Atwood.

Only 3 F4J supporters wrote on Mumsnet, in a very calm, polite and objective manor, they were met with some awful comments, all of which are documented by F4J. Showing the exact reaction those women had to reasoning. It wasn’t pretty.

I’ll say it again.. what if F4J were to post the same type of things?
No it wouldn’t lead to an advertisement in the newspaper, but it does lead to children not having contact with their Father. F4J are ‘out-trolled’ everyday by ex partners, solicitors and the police, all to be used against these men and women in family courts, as indeed it is.

Haha AllyF!

I missed the background. But if its true – then they truly deserved to be trolled. What a bunch of muppets.

We are not fighting to protect wife beaters, pedophiles, rapist, and the like.
Who would?

Right – but you are happy to generalise about all the women on Mumsnet though?

This is wide of the mark, but i do hate mumsnet at times, not all people on it by any means, but some of them on there are overbearing mothers who care about ridiculously outdated christian conservative family values.

@ AllyF

Really !! Belittle it if you must If you have nothing better to do, leave the campaigning to the campaigners. your opinion is neither welcomed or acknowledged. You have completely missed the point. You have managed to research the whole history after a couple of FB blogs and tweets in a matter of minutes. Think about the things your saying, because of the overwhelming amount of stupid people there are in the world is exactly why a few of us stand up and do the right thing for EVERYONE, including you. Years from now M&S will go the same way “The News Of The World” did and for much the same reason, They thought they were above reproach, criticism.

@ Louise – Thank you very much for your well-balanced comments.

I was one of the 3 F4J members who posted on MN (and the only woman!) – the one they called a “handmaiden” and “psychologically damaged” among other slurs. Even though I was posting my own thoughts and views, the very fact that they did not concur with the sisters meant that any hope of having a reasonable and sensible discussion was dead in the water.

To do nothing and say nothing about such abuse would be very wrong.

In order for ‘evil’ to prevail, all that need happen is for ‘good’ people to do nothing.

Sunny, Your bigoted closed mind is adamantly clear for all to see. With your childlike views its no wonder we cannot progress and better ourselves. Good luck with all your achievements and make sure you wash you hands when you’ve finished. You’re the reason we’re fighting, had you grown up with a father, you would have inherited some manners, and perhaps learned how to behave in polite society. Goodbye

That advertisement is hateful, poor boy.I made the mistake once of engaging in a ‘discussion’ with some F4J supporters. One of them accused me, apropos of absolutely nothing, of being against gay marriage. They seem to like throwing out unfounded and baseless allegations.

“Only 3 F4J supporters wrote on Mumsnet, in a very calm, polite and objective manor, ”

Louise…are you quite sure you’re a teacher?

Have you actually been onto Mumsnet and had a look? It’s not full of women swapping recipies you know. I was on the site on Tuesday night and I just could not believe the vitriol and nastiness that was directed at F4J. Totally vile.

I can see where F4J are coming from, even if they’re a little heavy handed in their tactics.

“Have you actually been onto Mumsnet and had a look? It’s not full of women swapping recipies you know”

You don’t say Keenan. Fancy that, women talking about subjects other than make ups, shopping and cake! Anyone reading MN might get the impression that women are all individuals with different opinions on a variety of subjects, just like men. Who’d have thought it, eh?

Mumsnet enemy number one. Hmm. Well, i’ve had a few battles on there (!) but they kept me from topping myself through 6 years of fining out, one by one, that all my 4 boys have disability ranging from ADD through to severe autism. I have had a lot of kindness from Mumsnet, and I have seen an awful lot given to people whoa re sick, have lost a spouse or child, or are in real need. Long live Mumsnet.

Oh and my husband will always recall, when faced by F4J commentary, the Taunton Carnival where our CHILDREN’S CARNIVAL CLUB was held up for a long time, in the rain and cold, by their protestors. Caring about children? Really? I think not! (Luckily the boys have now moved on from that carnival so won’t have to face that again).

Note my husband. And 4 boys. Oh man hater Mumsnet poster that I am!

@ 33. Sunny Hundal

“But if its true – then they truly deserved to be trolled. What a bunch of muppets.”

Don’t you feel any responsibility at all to discover whether things actually are true? The poster seems to back up Louise’s account rather than AllyF’s.

http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/428902_286556851406383_276642012397867_821175_1073959248_n.jpg

So- Mark, F4J supporters?

If Mumsnet will not pull threads etc are you OK for a forum that has helped many with disabled children, helped people escape violent relationships, helped those who have lost children and spouses, fed people with no money- to close?

Are you happy to pull MY support network as a largely housebound moth4r to 4 disabled children in order to further YOUR cause?

Thanks for that!

‘You don’t say Keenan. Fancy that, women talking about subjects other than make ups, shopping and cake! Anyone reading MN might get the impression that women are all individuals with different opinions on a variety of subjects, just like men. Who’d have thought it, eh?’

Oh they talk about other topics alright, and i should know, as I was a member for 6 years. Should I point out that I’m a woman? I learnt all sorts of things whilst I was on there, things like all men are potential rapists, all women are repressed by men, all intercourse is sexual slavery, you aren’t in love with your husband, you are ‘trauma bonded’ to him (look it up). One woman talked about how she worried about her 6 year old son being a potential rapist, based on the fact that he pestered her for a biscuit because he wouldn’t take no for an answer.I learnt that misandry doesn’t exist, only misogyny exists. I learnt that men must be punished for their crimes against womenkind.

Yes, I learnt lots of things on Mumsnet. Can’t see what F4J’s problem is really. What gender hatred?

Keenan

I’ve been posting on and reading MN for longer than you and I’ve never seen any of the things you describe. Can you come up with some examples which illustrate your assertion that MN promotes gender hatred?

@ Peachy.

Nobodies mentioned closing mumsnet. As far as I’m aware any negative comments made on f4j’s forums are wholely discouraged and removed, that member is cautioned and if the members persists, then that member is removed and blocked. Compare that to mumsnet !!!
As I said earlier the intention of mumsnet is a good one and should be praised for the good it has done. However the putrid stench running through its veins isn’t helping your argument. If mumsnet wishes to be portraid as such then, it is as such it will be viewed and judged. Clean up your act, so we don’t have to. Mumsnet is not promoting fair policies, it encourages the making of false allegations, actually perverting the course of justice. To achieve one thing. Do you believe that this is good? We do not.

50. Christopher

First off, well said @Louise.Your obviously well informed unlike most people who make use of any minor discrepancy to have a pop at people,eg @janet. I am a father and i have had to fight to see my child purely based on my ex deciding that im not suitable anymore. Women have all the power,power that is compounded by a misguided view that all dads are wasters.Children need both parents,petty differences should be put aside and the child put first.no one is perfect and relationships fail but thats no reason for innocent children to suffer from the fallout.Tit for Tat through solicitors and courts,thousands of pounds spent and for what.A simple conversation,compromise,willing and a plan could give a child what they need.love and support from two parents.Broken Britain,no wonder why.

51. Missile Smile

I don’t see a huge difference between this campaign and Helen Lewis’ and Laurie Penny’s campaigns in the New Statesman and Guardian about misogynist abuse of female bloggers. I can’t think of many men’s rights activists writing for high profile publications so the above advert seems like a logical alternative. As a result the only absurdity I see is in Sunny’s suggestion that one’s efforts should always be targeted at “enemy number one” as opposed to, say, anyone else that might exhibit signs of what is perceived as being a cultural problem (such as the above comments policies, for example, which explicitly forbids misogyny but not misandry).

I am quite sure that I’m a teacher yes, and I should know better than to not proof read-so yes I meant ‘manner’.
That just goes to show, people get things wrong. Just as some women have with their comments and actions, and some men have with their comments and actions. It is then left to others to point out the mistakes, just like Janet did. I see all the wonderful work that Mumsnet have done, and continue to do, and the majority of good,thoughtful people that contribute to the forums. However they have let themselves, and their supporters, down by not dealing with a number of comments from ill-informed angry people. Most forums try to “foster constructive debate” just like this one, and when people are unable to debate constructively it is up to the forum admin to deal with it appropriately. Mumsnet has not done this, they have allowed gender hatred to fester, unchecked. It is for that reason, as far as I can see, that F4J feel the need to campaign against them.

53. Dan Factor

Yep as the very first comment demonstrated as soon as you start pointing out men getting a raw deal and speak up for fairness for men you get labled white male patriarchal blah blah blah!

54. Dan Factor

Mothers4Justice. So basically you are saying fathers should never get custody of their children because they didn’t give birth to them. Oh and I’m not sure whether or not fathers changed nappies is ever taken into consideration in custody cases.

Mark

You have completely missed the point. You have managed to research the whole history after a couple of FB blogs and tweets in a matter of minutes.

Actually it took me hours. One of the truly weird thing about this campaign is that F4J seem really reluctant to spell out exactly the nature of their complaint, beyond that some nasty wimminz said some nasty things to them on t’internet.

When F4J produce the dossier of evidence of extensive, unmitigated hate speech, incitement to violence and criminality, bigotry and defamation that has gone unmoderated or encouraged on Mumsnet over the months and years, then I’ll be listening.

But in the meantime if I misrepresented anything in my post above, I’m happy for you to put us all right – as Louise did (slightly) above.

@ keenan

Thank you for your coments. This is exactly the reason why we are campaigning. Because of these comments (comment 47). If any other demographic had expressed such vile opinions they would be in court. Recently someone made derogatory comments about our six brave men blown up defending our liberty, they were swiftly brought to justice.

It shouldnt happen, it needs to stop, mumsnet needs to either reprimand it’s members or get rid of them, however if they are all for it. Then brace yourselves for a long campaign, M& S need to scrutinise who they team up with, it may bring the brand into disrepute. If you lay with dogs you’ll get flees.

This is exactly the reason why we are campaigning. Because of these comments. If any other demographic had expressed such vile opinions they would be in court. Recently someone made derogatory comments about our six brave men blown up defending our liberty, they were swiftly brought to justice.

It shouldnt happen, it needs to stop, mumsnet needs to either reprimand it’s members or get rid of them

Now there’s an interesting position to take. Now I’m fairly well known for my support of no platform, but even I regard the young Asian lad being arrested for his facebook postings as being a disgusting abuse of authority, rather than ‘swiftly brought to justice’. If that’s the justice fathers 4 justice are desiring, they can get to fuck, quite frankly.

@ cylux

My last comment was my own personal point of view and not that of F4J.

59. So Much For Subtlety

15. Mothers4Justice

It’s interesting how these men think women standing up for the rights of women and little girls who have been sexually abused, raped, beaten, starved, tortured, enslaved, oppressed and even murdered are ‘man haters.’ They’re not. They’re talking about the men who *do* commit these terrible atrocities against women and female children. They’re not talking about all men or pointing their finger at all men and claiming them as all being guilty as each other.

So first of all you play the victim card. Not so clever. This is not about women standing up for the rights of people who have been sexually abused, raped, beaten etc etc – although I notice your lack of compassion for any boys who have suffered any of these. Second, you claim you are not talking about all men or pointing the finger at all men, but actually that is just what you are doing. No where do you mention the fact that the *majority* of abuse of children, apart from rape, is done by women. You simply blame men.

If you’ve never been violent, sexually abusive or controlling towards women and female children then why get angry or feel persecuted when women talk about those who do? I find it odd.

That is like saying if you’re not a mugger why do you get upset by people who say all Black people are criminals.

This is offensive and hurtful to all Mothers, especially those who have Sons.

So what?

Sorry, but Fathers have more rights today than Mothers did for thousands of years where they didn’t get a single solitary say in the lives of the children they carried for 9 months, they went through agony and suffering giving birth to over a course of hours or days and who they had cared for since birth.

Sorry but this is irrelevant. You can’t say that your grandmother had it tough and so you get to be mean to men now. Men now did not cause women to die in childbirth in the mediaeval period. Nor is it true that men now have more rights than mothers did – they never had no say in the lives of their children. Nor do any of your absurd generalisations apply to all women. Not even all mothers.

Custody will always go to the main care giver, who more often than not was the Mother, because they are the ones who put in all the work, went through all the sleep deprivation and exhaustion. Sorry, but that is fair.

No it is not. Custody ought to be about the best interests of the child. Not as a reward for one narrow type of past behaviour. You are also wrong. Custody will always go to the mother even if she is not the main care giver. There are no real grounds on which a man can win custody. The system ought to look at the best interests of the child now and in the future. That is the only fair system.

I wonder if Fathers4Justice would complain about custody if it was them who had gone through 9 months pregnancy, hours or days of agony & suffering in childbirth and all the sleep deprivation and exhaution of looking after the baby?

If they never got custody, probably. Why not?

I have worked for 20 years in a Women’s Refuge. In all that time I have been to court with many women with reference to contact. On almost all occasions even where serious domestic violence has occurred often in front of the children, fathers have been given contact, sometimes supervised. I can only wonder why men from Fathers4justice have been refused contact of their children by the court. In a recent case the man was excessively abusive and threatening in court but was still granted contact.

Janet, there are many bad men and bad women out there,and in your work and my work we deal with them every day. This is where a difficulty arises. How do we balance making sure that good, caring Mothers and Fathers get to give their children the love they deserve whilst making sure that they are not in danger from either parent?
Out of interest how did the Fathers you have mentioned treat their children? Have problems arose since?

I would also like to point out that Fathers who support F4J have not been denied contact but have only been allowed contact that the Mother agrees to. In a recent case that I have been made aware of this was 4 hours a month for a Father that has not committed any offence, works full time, pays child support (and paid a larger amount via direct debit before the CSA were involved) and the Mother left the Father for another man.
The problem with the family law system is that it is not personalised, just generalised. Most men are treated as inadequate compared to the Mother.

Even in many cases where children have made it clear that they are afraid of contact it has continued. This is very hard for everyone to cope with. If contact is positive then it tends to continue as long as the father wants it to. I am often amazed that even with women who have been seriously abused they feel it is important that their child remains in contact with the father.

I am not a fathers rights activist but was intrigued enough to find out what the complaints was about. If anyone here is interested (and assuming this link hasn’t been posted already), I find this kind of thread pretty unpleasant http://goo.gl/nP9pS and, if men were posting similar things about women, I would be surprised if the Government or M&S or anyone else would touch it with a barge pole.

Tonight, @MumsnetTowers are claiming that half of all young me think that rape is okay – this is so disgraceful that I hardly know where to begin. These are our children they are talking about – my wonderful caring 19 year-old son and his friends, your sons, your brothers your partners and husbands… and this ‘fact will now be endlessly repeated to suggest that all men (or in this case, only half of all men) are dangerous to women and children.

How on earth did we get to this state?

Just re-read the “Fathers4Justice launch silly attack on Mumsnet” headline and can’t help being reminded of the right wing press response to 1970′s feminists. Now there is an interesting comparison…. :-)

66. Chaise Guevara

@ 64 Nick

“I find this kind of thread pretty unpleasant http://goo.gl/nP9pS

So do I. Most of the people there are fucking horrible human beings. But again, this is one forum full of twats. Mumsnet as a group is NOT answerable for that. Trying to shut them down isn’t the answer.

And btw (I’m on a roll here…) why does this site only delete ‘misogynist, racist, homophobic and xenophobic comments’ – what about misandrist comments?

68. Cheesy Monkey

I would have thought that membership of Fathers 4 Justice would be enough to stop access to their kids. And remember—these fuckers won’t pay any/enough child maintenance. That is, money that goes to their kids. Instead, they’re on top of something, cheap Batman costume straining against their corpulent arses and beer bellies. Fuck you. Do you have limited/no access to your kids? Feel upset about it? Awwww. But really, you’re upset about the money not the access. If you want improved access rights, then pay up, cunts. It’s that simple.

FOR LOUISE.

Louise, after reading some of your comments I can see that you are open to reason, which I commend you for. In talking about contact, (a word I hate in this context) I would like to tell to you that I am one of those fathers that has been forced, by my ex, into having only 2 hours a month at a contact centre under close scrutiny and having to pay for the privelige. You may ask, “well surely Paul you must have done something terribly wrong to merit such a drastic situation?”. I have done nothing wrong at all to my son and never would, except love and cherish him since the day he was born and indeed I was his main carer for most of his life while she went out to work. The ONLY reason that the courts arrive at such debasing treatment of fathers is that once the mother chooses to lie, (and lie she has in truck loads) then it is taken for granted that there is a genuine risk, because surely mum wouldn’t lie, would she? Now conversly, if the father was to make such an accusation, then thier is huge difference here. He would have to prove it beyond a shadow of doubt, but not so the mother! The courts are gender biased beyond all reason and father is made to jump through as many hoops as the Chimpanzee he has become. You have to believe me I have never felt so debased and humiliated as I do now, but the problem is if we refuse to be humiliated then we don’t get to see the ones we love, so we accept the dregs on offer. I love my son, I would easily give my very life for him, but to have to face this in my life is so hard and emotionally distressing. Mothers have the power to do what they like and to say what they like, they dish the orders out in court and are looked upon with sympathy.. that is the truth of the matter, it is the reality. I should know, ive experienced it firts hand, The courts are destroying fathers, and they must know it too.

FOR LOUISE.

Louise, after reading some of your comments I can see that you are open to reason, which I commendable. In talking about contact, (a word I hate in this context) I would like to tell to you that I am one of those fathers that has been forced, by my ex, into having only 2 hours a month at a contact centre under close scrutiny and having to pay for the privelige, prisoners get more visitation rights, and free of the payments. You may ask, “well surely Paul you must have done something terribly wrong to merit such a drastic situation?”. I can tell you that I have done nothing wrong at all to my son and never would, except love and cherish him since the day he was born and indeed I was his main carer for most of his life while she went out to work. The ONLY reason that the courts arrive at such debasing treatment of fathers is that once the mother chooses to lie, (and lie she has in truck loads) then it is taken for granted that there is a genuine risk, because surely mum wouldn’t lie… would she? Now conversly, if the father was to make such accusations, then that is a different matter altogether. He would have to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt, but not so the mother! The courts are gender biased beyond all reason and father is made to jump through as many hoops as the Chimpanzee he has become. You have to believe me I have never felt so debased and humiliated as I do now, but the problem is if we refuse to be humiliated and protest then we don’t get to see the ones we love, so we accept the dregs on offer at the price of being a muppet for our ex’s. I love my son, I would easily give my very life for him, but to have to face this in my life is so hard and emotionally distressing. Mothers have the power to do what they like and to say what they like, they dish the orders out in court and are looked upon with sympathy.. that is the truth of the matter, it is the reality. I should know, Ive experienced it first hand, The courts are destroying fathers, and they must know it too.

Cheesy monkey.

What I wonderful way you have with words my dear, Im so very glad you just spoke that way and the language you used befits the level of Mumsnet to a tee. I am greatful for confirming your attitude of hate and unreasonablness, I expect you will abuse me too now, I can live with that. But if you do you’ll be confirming that all your really interested in is the money ££££££. I suggest that fathering involves a little bit more than that, it involves our love, our need to be there for our kids, being allowed to be in thier presence our time with them. Is thIs conditional on just.. HAND OVER THE MONEY YOU “CUNTS” sorry, as you put it, your words not mine. I now withdraw, ive read enough of this to know when its time to leave, Respects to you all.

72. Cheesy Monkey

@71

Well that made perfect sense. Ta muchly.

73. So Much For Subtlety

68. Cheesy Monkey

I would have thought that membership of Fathers 4 Justice would be enough to stop access to their kids. And remember—these fuckers won’t pay any/enough child maintenance. That is, money that goes to their kids.

Sorry but on what basis do you make this claim? The money does not go to their children. It goes to their ex-wives. There is no obligation whatsoever that the money is spent on the children. None.

If you want improved access rights, then pay up, cunts. It’s that simple.

Except it isn’t. It does not matter what a man does, the chances he will have access is remote unless his ex-wife agrees to it. There is no effort by the UK courts whatsoever to enforce access when it comes to men. Regardless of whether he pays or not. In fact the sensible thing is not to pay. It does not make men any worse off.

6/half dozen

@67

And btw (I’m on a roll here…) why does this site only delete ‘misogynist, racist, homophobic and xenophobic comments’ – what about misandrist comments?

Because those reinforce and propagate already existing systems of oppression, inequality and violence whereas misandrist, heterophobic and reverse-racist comments do not.

76. Chaise Guevara

@ 68 Cheesy Monkey

“I would have thought that membership of Fathers 4 Justice would be enough to stop access to their kids. And remember—these fuckers won’t pay any/enough child maintenance. That is, money that goes to their kids. Instead, they’re on top of something, cheap Batman costume straining against their corpulent arses and beer bellies. Fuck you. Do you have limited/no access to your kids? Feel upset about it? Awwww. But really, you’re upset about the money not the access. If you want improved access rights, then pay up, cunts. It’s that simple.”

Wow. Sweeping and probably libellous statements based on thin air? Check. Irrelevant personal insults? Check. Sneering at people because *they’re not able to see their own kids*? Check.

Cheesy Monkey, one day the wankers of the world are going to gather to build a statue of you.

77. Chaise Guevara

@ 75 Cylux

“Because those reinforce and propagate already existing systems of oppression, inequality and violence whereas misandrist, heterophobic and reverse-racist comments do not.”

Broadly true, but it IS a bit weird that Sunny deliberately set up a double standard by banning “misogynist” comments, when saying “sexist” comments were out of bounds would give the same protection to women while also extending it to men, and be quicker to write, even!

Given Sunny’s general behaviour on threads that involve controversial feminist ideas, I suspect this is another symptom of his obvious burning desire to be seen as “right-on”.

I have every sympathy for children who lose contact with a parent but this campaign does nothing to help fathers. It’s a desperate attempt by F4J for publicity. Their Facebook page was closed recently probably because they were in contempt of court for disclosing information that the court rules do not allow to protect the privacy of children. In the last couple of weeks they have launched an attack on the one parent organisation, Gingerbread incurring the wrath of the of the Fatherhood Institute, Matt O’Connor has attacked the barrister’s blog Pinktape and it is very possible they have orchestrated this campaign against M&S by deliberately provoking posters on Mumsnet. It really is a case of the kettle calling the pot black. I have some screen shots on my old computer of the F4J forum that was absolutely full of gender hate.

In his letter to M&S Matt O’Connor threatened “Ours is not a campaign that will occupy. Ours is a campaign that will electrify.” Apparently he was arrested for being naked! Not a pretty sight I would imagine.

I don’t know what F4J hopes the boycott will achieve, their 11,000 followers pale into insignificance compared to the hundreds of thousands of men and women who visit Mumsnet on a regular basis. Very silly campaign that is most likely to boost M&S profits.

79. the a&e charge nurse

[78] “It’s a desperate attempt by F4J for publicity” – it is desperate, but this does not tell us WHY it might be so, although we do know that fathers involved in child custody proceedings say the system is heavily stacked against them.

According to one former Boomtown Rat, “In the near future the Family Law under which we endure will be seen as barbaric, criminally damaging, abusive, neglectful, harmful to society, the family, the parents and the children in whose name it purports to act. It is beyond scrutiny or criticism and like a secret society its members – the judges, lawyers, social and child “care” agencies behave like any closed vested interest and protect each others’ backs.

“The court is entirely informed by outdated social engineering models and contemporary attitudes rather than fact, precedent rather than common sense and modish unproven nostrums rather than present day realities. It is a disgraceful mess. A farrago of cod professionalism and faux concern largely predicated on nonsensical social guff, mumbo-jumbo and psycho-babble. Dangling at the other end of this are the lives of thousands of British children and their families.
http://blogs.findlaw.co.uk/solicitor/2009/12/geldof-slams-barbaric-and-abusive-uk-child-custody-laws.html

Like LibertarianLou I turned to quantumvaleat’s blog with an open mind, but found it seriously off putting. But – I’ve had similar thoughts to Nick, in that in the past it has struck me that Fathers4Justice gets treated rather like the suffragettes used to be – with fear, hostility and derision. I feel sorry for Paul – it’s tiring and difficult being a mother with small children, but fathers working long hours aren’t necessarily having fun either, and are trying to help their families. If women – I’m thinking back to a previous comment here – resent the way their husband are advancing in their careers, then maybe that’s something for negotiation and discussion within the family – and a good reason to equalise parental leave legislation etc.

Perhaps the organisation Fathers4Justice itself *does* deserve to be viewed with some scepticism – generally I’ve found (say on Comment is Free) that this topic seems to be dominated by men with extreme, even misogynist, views – perhaps that puts off other men from talking about their bad experiences, just as feminism has sometimes alienated some women because it seemed strident.

82. Missile Smile

@cylux 75.

“Because those reinforce and propagate already existing systems of oppression, inequality and violence whereas misandrist, heterophobic and reverse-racist comments do not.”

Misogyny and misandry are both branches of sexism. You either stand against sexism or you don’t. What your comment does is to go through a lot of logical contortionism to justify discrimination. You’re essentially saying discriminating comments are okay as long as they’re not “reinforcing and propagating already existing systems of oppression, inequality and violence” which, by the way, not all misogynist, racist, homophobic and xenophobic comments necessarily do anyway and which misandrist comments are perfectly capable of doing.

Perhaps you should start objecting to any form of discrimation based on gender, race and/or sexual orientation on a moral level and not a conditional one.

83. Cheesy Monkey

@76

Wow. Sweeping and probably libellous statements based on thin air? Check. Irrelevant personal insults? Check. Sneering at people because *they’re not able to see their own kids*? Check.

Nah. It’s a fair beating for whinging misogynistic arseholes who do not or try not to pay maintenance. By and large there’s a reason these fathers in name only get limited/no access.

84. So Much For Subtlety

75. Cylux

Because those reinforce and propagate already existing systems of oppression, inequality and violence whereas misandrist, heterophobic and reverse-racist comments do not.

Although that raises the issue of what level of oppression you look at. White South Africans no longer are a dominant majority in South Africa. As White British people are not in parts of Britain. But inciting hatred against them is still fine with the UK Left. Men have never been numerically dominant and in areas like family law they are not treated equally. So this ought to be an area where misogyny is allowed and misandry is not. But of course it doesn’t work that way.

What you mean is that inciting hatred of people you don’t like is fine while inciting hatred of groups you hope are on your side is not.

85. So Much For Subtlety

80. Sarah AB

But – I’ve had similar thoughts to Nick, in that in the past it has struck me that Fathers4Justice gets treated rather like the suffragettes used to be – with fear, hostility and derision.

Well isn’t there a fake Gandhi quote that says first they ignore you, then they insult you and then they give in? The Father’s Rights people seem to be on to something and positive coverage of their issues, although not them themselves, definitely seems to be on the rise.

If women – I’m thinking back to a previous comment here – resent the way their husband are advancing in their careers, then maybe that’s something for negotiation and discussion within the family – and a good reason to equalise parental leave legislation etc.

Although this is one of those lose-lose situations for men. If you talk to unhappy married women as many seem unhappy with the fact their husband does not earn enough (although they rarely express it so bluntly) as that they earn too much. More in my experience. Women don’t really resent men for advancing their careers half as much as they do for not being ambitious enough.

81. Sarah AB

generally I’ve found (say on Comment is Free) that this topic seems to be dominated by men with extreme, even misogynist, views – perhaps that puts off other men from talking about their bad experiences, just as feminism has sometimes alienated some women because it seemed strident.

In both cases I expect that the dislike was not a pre-existing condition but arose from their direct experience of bad treatment. Especially once the law is involved. If other people were even remotely sympathetic, I expect that these men would be more reasonable. Again if you talk to divorced men it is striking how often they will say every single woman they knew took their wife’s side. Even their mothers and sisters. It does tend to create an Us-and-Them issue.

83. Cheesy Monkey

Nah. It’s a fair beating for whinging misogynistic arseholes who do not or try not to pay maintenance. By and large there’s a reason these fathers in name only get limited/no access.

If you have alienated me and Chaise you have lost any chance of being taken seriously. That is a very wide range of opinion. You’re just doubling down on your original stupidity now. You have no idea whether these men do or do not pay maintenance – and by and large British men have a very good record. Nor do you have a clue whether or not that causes limited access. You’re just making sh!t up. And looking like a bigger idiot every time you do. When in a hole, stop digging.

86. So Much For Subtlety

It is obvious that the laws against men in the Family Court won’t last much longer if they have alienated the Middle Class. And they do seem to be moving that way. Too many faultless middle class men getting screwed. As long as it was chavs and working class oiks (as in Fathers4Justice) no one cared. So it was interesting to see this article in the Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/relationships/divorce/8870302/Louis-de-Bernieres-Nearly-losing-my-children-was-hell.html

How does Mumsnet deal with this?

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a1416593-Louis-de-Bernieres-on-divorce

They clearly do have a problem with hatred. Which if directed against anyone else would be recognised as such. Yes, Fathers4Justice are loons and probably unpleasant people. But that doesn’t mean half the commentators in that thread are not as bad. I did like this one:

“IEatThePannenkoeken Tue 28-Feb-12 13:15:33

He sounds like a complete fool who is too emotionally involved to think objectively. It’s a shame people have bothered to give him air time.”

Yes. If only he did not give a damn about his children. He would be a much better father.

85. So Much For Subtlety wrote;

“You have no idea whether these men do or do not pay maintenance”

But we do know F4J ran a Don’t Pay the CSA campaign last year ;)

@ stdiw

F4J have not run a “Dont pay CSA” campaigne. Please get you facts right before posting. Happy mothers day

“!As long as it was chavs and working class oiks (as in Fathers4Justice) no one cared.”

For your info F4J Members consist of Doctor, Police, Service Personel, Dentists, Bank Clerks, IT, Vets, Foster Parents, Teachers the list is endless and probably a few chavs. So what. Wrong is wrong no matter who or what you are.

90. the a&e charge nurse

“if you were M&S and had to pick a side between a massive website aimed at mothers and some angry dads – what would you do? No brainer” – oh, I’m sure M&S will follow the money.

Far easier to ignore a social injustice by focussing on the ‘angry dads’ rather than the consequences of our current laws.

Did you know in some parts of the world 85% of youth in prison are fatherless; 71% of high school dropouts are fatherless; 90% of runaway children are fatherless; and fatherless youth exhibit higher levels of depression and suicide, delinquency, promiscuity and teen pregnancy, behavioural problems and illicit and licit substance abuse?

And, 70% cent of children of divorce believe that equal amounts of time with each
parent is the best living arrangement for children, and children who have had equal time arrangements have the best relations with each of their parents after divorce.
A recent meta-analysis of the major North American studies comparing sole and joint physical custody arrangements has shown that children in joint custody arrangements fare significantly better on all adjustment measures than children who live in sole custody arrangements. Children in joint custody arrangements had fewer behavioural and emotional problems, higher self-esteem, and better family relations and school performance than children in sole custody arrangements. The positive outcomes of joint custody were also evident among high-conflict couples.
http://www.savanah-jade.org/relocation/relocation.pdf

Still, keep blaming the loopy dads for the crimes of de menz if it makes you happy.

91. Chaise Guevara

@ 82 Cheesy Monkey

“Nah. It’s a fair beating for whinging misogynistic arseholes who do not or try not to pay maintenance. By and large there’s a reason these fathers in name only get limited/no access.”

Yeah, but you threw the accusation at every single F4J member, didn’t you?

@82 A quick look at history will inform everyone whom has consistently suffered at the hands of whom. Modern day attempts to re-define racism, sexism and sexuality discrimination so that they ‘cut both ways’ are little more than a vulgar attempt to roll back equality and allow the oppressor to wield the victim card over the oppressed.

93. Chaise Guevara

@ 92 Cylux

“A quick look at history will inform everyone whom has consistently suffered at the hands of whom. Modern day attempts to re-define racism, sexism and sexuality discrimination so that they ‘cut both ways’ are little more than a vulgar attempt to roll back equality and allow the oppressor to wield the victim card over the oppressed.”

Wow. So basically, as a white straight male I should just shut up and deal with any prejudice I suffer, no matter how unfair and how injurious, because I’m somehow responsible for the actions of white straight male bigots? In fact, we shouldn’t even admit that prejudice against me is a possibility?

It’s not a fucking competition, Cylux. Bigotry is wrong in all its forms. Your brand of bigotry isn’t as harmful in practice, but that’s no reason to endorse it. And you’re giving ample ammunition to the traditional bigots by showing that you’re just as bad as them.

For whatever reason, you may enjoy turning the equality issue into “Men VS Women!” or “Gays VS Straights!” Some of us, the non-bigots, prefer the idea that everyone should be treated equally instead of being judged based on their demographics.

[As a side note, you're really onto a loser talking about "who has suffered at the hands of whom" in a thread that centres on child custody.]

@93 At the end of the civil war and the abolition of slavery in the states there were likely to be many black people who harboured sweeping prejudices against white folks. For bleedingly obvious reasons.
Do you believe it would have been instructive to wag your finger at them for their ‘racism’? Or would you recognise it for what it was – an understandable response to the system in which they had suffered?

@cylux – I don’t see how that is comparable to the case of an individual man, in the UK today, who has experienced injustice from a woman/the courts.

I find all this bizarre… Mumsnet wouldn’t have got anywhere near the following it has unless it was fulfilling a very popular need – that need was for a supportive network of other mothers facing the same challenge who individually felt isolated and powerless. Combined they profit from shared information and their children benefit too as group support makes for better parenting and less stressed mothers. To attack Mumsnet is to attack a network of mothers and that’s all there is to it.

I’ve been through this argument from both sides – been through a messy divorce from an alcoholic and I needed to protect our children from his behaviour, I am also now with a divorced father who can’t get access to his own children.

Fathers4Justice does have a place and they do deserve to be listened to. Many estranged fathers do get the rough end some times but the fault for that doesn’t lay with Mumsnet or any of it’s members – it lays with the Judicial system, the framework of which doesn’t get written on Mumsnet forums either. If this advert is really from Father4Justice they have set back the cause of paternal inclusion rather than advanced forward the debate. Father4Justice needs to engage with effective campaigning and realise image is everything if you want to get taken seriously… Mumsnet is the wrong target and is just going to get you laughed at I’m afraid.

@ 1. Kieran.

Some ex husbands never see their children, and as a result, they commit SUICIDE !!!

@95 That’ll be why the target of their ire is mumsnet then.

99. Chaise Guevara

@ 94 Cylux

“At the end of the civil war and the abolition of slavery in the states there were likely to be many black people who harboured sweeping prejudices against white folks. For bleedingly obvious reasons.
Do you believe it would have been instructive to wag your finger at them for their ‘racism’? Or would you recognise it for what it was – an understandable response to the system in which they had suffered?”

I could call it racism while still seeing it as forgivable. It’s still a bad thing in itself, but the mitigating circumstances are strong.

I would call anti-white racism, misandry and the rest in this time and place considerably less understandable. Obviously it depends on the individual, but generally these groups are a LOT less dominant than American slave-owners.

More to the point, you need to show why egalitarianism is anti-equality, as per your previous claim.

I could call it racism while still seeing it as forgivable. It’s still a bad thing in itself, but the mitigating circumstances are strong.

Presumably it was these ‘mitigating circumstances’ that led to the need of the civil rights movement. It is also unclear how successful that movement would have been without the known threat of Black Supremacists being there ready to pick up the torch, and will swelled ranks from the moderates of the civil rights movement, should it have failed.

101. Chaise Guevara

@ 100 Cylux

“Presumably it was these ‘mitigating circumstances’ that led to the need of the civil rights movement.” ”

Well, yes. Why are we on this tangent again?

“It is also unclear how successful that movement would have been without the known threat of Black Supremacists being there ready to pick up the torch, and will swelled ranks from the moderates of the civil rights movement, should it have failed.”

Bad things can have good consequences sometimes. If a racist prevents his daughter from marrying a black guy because he doesn’t want mixed-race grandkids, and then it turns out that the black guy in question is in fact a wife-beater, then his racism actually had positive consequences – but that doesn’t make racism great.

Oh, and *ahem*:

More to the point, you need to show why egalitarianism is anti-equality, as per your previous claim.

More to the point, you need to show why egalitarianism is anti-equality, as per your previous claim.

What makes you think your stance is egalitarian? If you treat things of unequal power and weight as possessing the same power and weight, and attempt to remove these personal interactions out of the context of the systems in which they exist and propagate, holding them up as ‘equally bad’, you do little but entrench current inequality. If not increase it further. It’s a bit like the media’s preference for neutrality in their reporting as opposed to impartiality.

88. Mark wrote:

“@ stdiw

F4J have not run a “Dont pay CSA” campaigne. Please get you facts right before posting. Happy mothers day”

Thank you. My facts are accurate and I always check before posting. See F4J Facebook entry 3rd July 2011.

104. Just Visiting

Cylux

If you don;t mind me chipping in.

> What makes you think your stance is egalitarian? If you treat things of unequal power and weight….

IMHO it is clear that your approach is fundamentally flawed.

You wrote:

> A quick look at history will inform everyone whom has consistently suffered at the hands of whom.

So the big question is – how far back in history do you suggest looking?

And when will you stop punishing people today, for inequality that happened before them?

> Modern day attempts to re-define racism, sexism and sexuality discrimination so that they ‘cut both ways’ are little more than a vulgar attempt to roll back equality and allow the oppressor to wield the victim card over the oppressed.

Your language is so labelling – why should a father in a family court today be labelled ‘the oppressor’ just because 50 years ago British culture and law was different?

Chaise’s position seems entirely egalitarian – to treat each individual on their merits, not as labelled by some ‘quick look back at history’

@104 I supplied my argument regarding the family courts up @8, the point I’m currently addressing started @67 and concerns libcon’s commenting policy. I will note that f4j and the website linked at reaction 18 – http://antimisandry.com/forums/ both regard feminism as the source of their problems.

106. Missile Smile

@Cylux 92. & 94.

“Modern day attempts to re-define racism, sexism and sexuality discrimination…allow the oppressor to wield the victim card over the oppressed.”

If you’re not encompassing all races, sexes and sexual orientations when talking about racist, sexist and sexuality discrimination then the charge of re-definition is levelled at you. Using words like “oppressor” and “oppressed” in this context is, again, simply an attempt to justify discrimination against whoever the “oppressor” is supposed to be (men presumably).

To reply to you broadly; misandry is as old as misogyny. There’s nothing “modern” about it. Both are as old as gender roles themselves and I think a site that considers itself progressive could quite easily absorb a neogalism into its comments policy that concerns gender discrimination. Or, as another commenter pointed out, they could just use “sexist”.

More specifically, I don’t see how your racist slaves analogy is at all relevant here. The inequalities that exist against men in family law aren’t the result of some backlash of female emancipation as you seem to be suggesting in your analogy. They are the result of fathers not being seen as equal parents which is an ancient prejudice rooted in a biological deterministic belief that a father’s paternal instinct doesn’t have an equal value to that of the mother’s.

“We have a tight comments policy aimed at fostering constructive debate”

Liberal Conspiracy, your comments here are neither constructive or fair to all the decent Dads who have suffered at the hands of the Family Law Courts and our ridiculously biased system of abuse towards our children.
FFJ attempt to highlight these injustices which our press and Government continue to ignore.
Until you have personally experienced the heartache that thousands of parents suffer each day including Mums and Grandparents I suggest you keep your silly little bitter blog comments to yourself.
“Some angry Dads?” You really do have no idea.

108. Hitcham Yezza

Women use children as weapons to hurt their ex’s.

109. Seán Carraher

Was Muhammad Ali doing a stupid Publicity Stunt when he refused to go to war against the people of Vietnam. I don’t think so as he was jailed for not doing so Was Nelson Mandela wrong for fighing for Justice against a flawed system in South Africa he was also jailed and eventually became the leader of his counrty. Why does Fathers for Justice (F4J) exist? Clearly F4J feel that something is wrong with the System and they feel change is needed. Unless you have directly exposed to the Family Law Court System you can have no concept of the appalling injustices that take place against Children and their Parents.

For anyone that hasn’t actually “looked” at the “baby-graffiti” photo, its photo-shopped, if you actually think its “real” …need more be said…

112. Seán Carraher

Was Muhammad Ali doing a stupid Publicity Stunt when he refused to go to war against the people of Vietnam. I don’t think so as he was jailed for not doing so Was Nelson Mandela wrong for fighing for Justice against a flawed system in South Africa he was also jailed and eventually became the leader of his counrty. Why does Fathers for Justice (F4J) exist? Clearly F4J feel that something is wrong with the System and they feel change is needed. Unless you have been directly exposed to the Family Law Court System you can have no concept of the appalling injustices that take place against Children and their Parents

113. Chaise Guevara

@ 102 Cylux

“What makes you think your stance is egalitarian?”

My question was weighted, fair enough. See below.

“If you treat things of unequal power and weight as possessing the same power and weight, and attempt to remove these personal interactions out of the context of the systems in which they exist and propagate, holding them up as ‘equally bad’, you do little but entrench current inequality. ”

I’m not doing that, though. I’m saying everyone should be entitled to the same rights and protections, both under the law and in private forums like LC. Failure to do this is a) bigoted and b) validates the inevitable backlash. It’s counterproductive AND wrong. You’re not so much entrenching inequality as your are actively cheering it on while demanding more inequality ASAP.

What I’m not doing is pretending these groups have equal power or that anti-overdog bigotry is as harmful as anti-underdog bigotry (you could say it was equally wrong, but the negative effects are not as high). If you’d actually read my posts you’d know that, as I’ve gone out of my way to point it out.

Insofar as your position makes sense, it seems to assume that women need a biased ruleset of LC and elsewhere so that it’s easier to shut males up than females. Do you actually believe this? If not, why support such a system?

114. Chaise Guevara

@ 104 JV

Thanks – you make some excellent points that I really should have brought up myself!

In referenec to commet 109 Sean.

Sean you speak the truth when you say that one has to experience the Family courts to actually know what is really going on in them. I am fed up of reading the emnity here, of one party trying to convince the other of what the truth is. I ask that you all stop the bickering and the division between you all, I ask it in the spirit of peace and for the sake of our children.

Truth is known only to those that have suffered in the courts, unless you have been there you cannot know of the debasement, of the sheer abuse of fathers. I say this as one that has been fighting for 3 years to see the son I truly love and I know he loves me too, of this I am assured. Whether you are a man or a woman, I care not, but I speak the truth. I want you to believe me when I say that Cafcass actually told me to stop writing “I love you” when I wrote to my son. They asked me to stop enquiring about his education and his schooling. They crossed out any reference, in my letters to him, about holidays and the toys I still keep for him. When I wrote the words “I miss you son”, they crossed it out. What these monsters were trying to do was cut off all bonds of affection we have for each other. I beg you to believe what I am writing here, I dont care if you are male or female, but believe me I speak the truth.

On the basis of what I have described I appealed my case to the high court in London, and my case was upheld, the Judges were very sympathetic and threw out completely what had gone on before. You mothers out there, I mean you no harm, I am a man of peace and infact I am a pacafist, it is not in me to cause harm to anyone. But if only you knew in reality what is taking place in our courts, you would know the truth. There is something going wrong in the family courts, something bordering on evil it has to stop before more fathers kill themselves. I wish we could all speak in peace and stop the bickering. Please I beg you we can all work together if we try. Whatever gender we are please think of the children and what they want. If they want to see thier dads, then for pity’s sake let them, as my son does. Peace to you all.

116. the a&e charge nurse

[108] “Some angry Dads?” You really do have no idea’ – absolutely.

Snickering because the protest does not satisfy certain standards – we even have commentators here arguing that discrimination, and the sins of the father (depending on how far you want to go back in history) or if not simply belonging to da menz is an appropriate basis for making life changing legal decisions.

What happened to the idea that legal decisions should turn on a case by case basis, or that we are all equal before the law?

117. Clive Griffin

It takes courage and passion to take drastic measures that arouse public awareness of serious issues like inequality and gender hatred. Mumsnet allow bitter twisted male hating mothers to spew thier hatred of males in a public forum namely thier website. If this was racial hatred or homophobic material the site would be closed down and charges brought. Gender hatred should not be tolarated at any level and those that sponsor gender hatred should be vilified (namely M & S) . F4J are passionate about what they stand for and rightly so because right now fathers have and are contemplating suicide after fighting lengthy gender bias court battles to see there children, and children are self harming ,taking drugs and turning to crime because of the lack of a positive male role model in their lives.
Keep up the fight F4J and well done.!

I will admit I asked a legitimate question on mumsnet and was accused of being a paedo, rapist wife beater within minutes, I was not offensive but the abuse I was subjected to was beyond belief, the foul language and name calling was well over the top, I did not rise to their abuse which seemed to antagonize the members of this group even more……. really is this how these mothers bring up our children? And we wonder why there are riots etc. Some fathers would give their right arm to have an afternoon with their children. Not all fathers are raping wife beaters and paedos, so stop taring us all with the same brush.

I am very familiar with Mumsnet. It certainly allows man-bashing/gender hatred, especially in the Feminist section (where plenty of regulars admit to not even having kids). I am not anti-Feminism btw, but many Mumsnet feminists just clearly despise men, If it was Dadsnet and there was the same amount of woman-bashing it would definitely be called out for its misogyny.

It is promoted as a site for parents but there are very few men there as they get banned if they dare disagree with a woman or take offence at the man-bashing. That many of the mothers on that site must have male children is frightening.

Will you lot please post links when you accuse mumsnet users of abusing you so we can judge for ourselves? Right now you’re just making assertions with no proof.

If anyone wants examples of gender hatred on Mumsnet, try the Mumsnet Sucks FB page or Blog. It has compiled many.

123. the a&e charge nurse

“A significant number of fathers, some estimate as many as 40%, will within two years of the split lose all contact with their children. Previously this had been seen as a sign of male fecklessness, but now it is also being recognised that dads are being pushed away, not only by the residual conflict with ex-partners, but also by a legal system that works against them maintaining relationships with their children”.

“In the past, public sympathy may well have rested with the court, assuming it was doing its best for the children. But now there is growing evidence that family law has spectacularly failed to keep up with the changing role of men within the home and that children are suffering as a result. Judges are accused of stereotyping, making a legal presumption in favour of the mother and awarding meagre access rights to dads”.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/sep/26/family-courts-fathers-custody

Gender hatred on Mumsnet today -
http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/1428443-Does-reading-about-male-abuse-affect-how-you-see-men?

Asked if they hate men, many admit they do, a common view is that there are some good men but most are bad. A simplification, but that’s how it reads. A quote like this is allowed to stand, undeleted and unchallenged. “Have you ever wondered why we are not just in armed combat against you? It’s not because there’s a shortage of kitchen knives in this country. It is because we believe in your humanity, against all the evidence.” – Andrea Dworkin’ So the ‘evidence’ is that men are inhuman.

Or this – “Betadad is not an out and out misogynist – he believes in women’s rights, equality, our humanity (sorry to speak for you Betadad, correct me if I misrepresent you). But he’s basically telling us, that if we want equality, we’re on our own. [she has completely misrepresented him if you read his post] I think if we accept that, we can stop feeling angry with men as a class, because we don’t expect anything from them – it’s a bit like when you stop expecting anything from an abusive parent’ Men are like abusive parents, nice.

Or this – ‘Also I don’t think much of men as a group miloben, given how fiercely they have fought female freedom at every step of the way and how they are still fighting it or in many cases still oppressing women.’ Have men – all men, most men, REALLY fiercely fought against female freedom every step of the way? This poster thinks so anyway, and of course her statement goes unchallenged, in fact it’s agreed with.

Or this – ‘When I meet a stranger who is male, my default position is neutral friendliness on the surface with a significant amount of wariness underneath. I am looking to see if they show signs of misogyny/sexism, and to some extent I am expecting it because more often than not they do.’ Default mistrust of any man, assumption that they will be a misogynist, sweet.

Or this, all from the same one thread remember – ‘How much male on female violence is due to a man seeking out a woman because she is a woman (i.e. misogyny), and how much is due to the fact that she is just ‘there’, the nearest person? Are men pre-disposed to batter anything in range when it takes their fancy, or do they have a mean, cowardly inner switch that allows them to simmer and store their rage until they get home to their weaker partner? Are there similar studies on male-on-male violence within gay couples? For example, if 75 per cent of women in couples are battered, and 75 per cent of males are also battered in gay households, then we could say that it isn’t misogyny, but a non-sexist violent tendency.’ Actually the highest rates of DV are between lesbian couples, and women commit the same amount of DV against men as vice versa.

Or this – ‘I think men are violent, period.’

Or this – ‘From memory the figures show overwhelmingly that:
Most relationship violence (a high percentage) occurs within heterosexual relationships, from the man to the woman.
The second category is violence within male gay relationships, though it is significantly lower.
I can’t remember the order of female on male violence or female on female within relationships, but they were the bottom two and the figures were small.’ Completely inaccurate, do the research.

THIS! – ‘So then, OP. You wonderful dad, brother, husband and son. However nice they are in your eyes, every other Mumsnetter will see them through the same veil of anger and hatred that you have.
They wont see the flowers on Mothers Day, or the cup of tea in bed, or the wonderful family holidays you enjoy. They see wife batterers, rapists, street gang members and privileged misogynists. I guess what has been seen cannot be unseen. Your family, your own flesh and blood, carrying out all these acts.’ Beggars belief. Gender hatred there on Mumsnet, undeniable. And that’s just one thread I found very easily.

125. Chaise Guevara

@ Dan

Look, of COURSE you can find misandrists and loopy “feminists” on a large, predominately female forum. It shouldn’t be in doubt.

The issue is whether or not Mumsnet takes the blame for the views of some of it’s members. I’d say not, for much the same reason that if I heard a punter making racist remarks at my local, I wouldn’t start a hate campaign against the pub-owner.

It’s a big forum. Pruning a few of the worst comments is good, and the evidence we’ve seen shows that they try to do that. But they can’t catch everything, and they certainly have no need to delete everything that you or anyone else considers offensive.

I’m very sympathic to the founding cause of F4J, I just think it’s totally wide of the mark here.

You are quick to go on about womens right ! Bravo ! but you miss the point. When you stand next to a man who is denied contact because the mother is so bitter and twisted that she says it will not happen and you see the upset and destroying of a man and have to pick up the pieces then you may understand how unfair Family law is. When the courts do nothing to enforce orders, nothing happens to these so called women ! they should be ashamed to give themselves the name WOMAN ! I am ashamed !!!! the kids suffer ! because their mothers cannot be big enough to put their feelings first. If you think its about anything else you are mistaken. A child needs a mother and a father and most men do not see their kids , not because the courts say they cant but because the courts do nothing to enforce orders !

127. emma Jones

Until you are a dad or a loving person stuck between two warring parents you really have not much right to comment. Ignorance is bliss. Until one day you wake up and your wife has run off with a new or old lover and taken your children, your house, your pension,your car, your dignity and all you have worked for, expect for the shirt on your back ( and she would try this too), and this country will stand by mum all the way, over you, however important you feel you are.

Lets hope this doesn’t happen but it could…to you!!!!!!!!!! Millionaire or pauper!!!!

god help you when you end up in the family courts! You will be grateful for support groups.

they are sanity in a hopeless place. This world is insane.

@113

Insofar as your position makes sense, it seems to assume that women need a biased ruleset of LC and elsewhere so that it’s easier to shut males up than females. Do you actually believe this? If not, why support such a system?

Pop quiz for you, on a post discussing female genital mutilation hosted absolutely anywhere on the internet, what subject, with devastating inevitability, gets discussed the most?
If you get the right answer you might have a glimmer of the truth.

129. Chaise Guevara

@ 128 Cylux

“Pop quiz for you, on a post discussing female genital mutilation hosted absolutely anywhere on the internet, what subject, with devastating inevitability, gets discussed the most?”

Ooh, ooh! Circumcision! It’s circumcision, isn’t it? I mean, there’s always some moron who brings it up because he thinks a minor religious/sanitary operation is the same thing as brutal mutilation designed to oppress a whole gender. Am I right?

“If you get the right answer you might have a glimmer of the truth.”

Regardless of whether I got the right answer, if you want to patronise me you need to actually address my fecking arguments at some point, rather than lobbing non-sequiturs over your shoulder then acting all superior.

Seriously Cylux, you’re high on my list of “people on LC who deserve respect”, and I wouldn’t say that if I didn’t mean it, but you’re acting like a total weasel in this thread. Possibly because you’ve manouvered yourself into defending the indefensible.

130. Chaise Guevara

@ 127 emma jones

“Until you are a dad or a loving person stuck between two warring parents you really have not much right to comment.”

This is a classic case of losing the argument before you’ve even said your piece. If you’re not EXACTLY LIKE ME, you have NO RIGHT TO SPEAK! BLAARRGH!

Incidentally, I would now like to advance the theory that some of the first names on this thread may imply a gender of the speaker that is not entirely accurate. Mine included, but I’m not trying to fool anyone with it.

in reply to Chaise Guevara your comment makes no sense!!!?????

what do you mean “this is a classic case of losing the argument before you’ve even said your piece. If you’re not EXACTLY LIKE ME, you have NO RIGHT TO SPEAK! BLAARRGH!”

well its true , how can you describe the taste of an orange if youve never eaten it or describe the colour of the sky if youve never seen it! Unless you experience the stress of not being able to see your child and have to go to court to just to gain access and then the order gets broken and you have to go back again then you will realise!

sounds like you are a typical sterotype person who likes to comment on something they really know nothing about.

I rest my case!

129 chaise.
i was born a woman. get over it!!!!
I have free speech. don’t call me a liar!!!!

@129 True I have been dodging, and you are right that male Circumcision is what inevitably becomes ‘the topic’. For some reason, on any online discussion featuring a mixture of both sexes should the OP be about issues specifically relating to women there’s always a movement toward discussing a related, even if tenuously, subject that centres on men, unless the commenting is heavily policed to ensure the thread stays on topic. With this in mind I ask that you consider the idea that the internet is inherently biased against women. In short, misogyny is easier to come by on the internet than misandry (and Dan’s examples @124 are fairly milquetoast compared to some of the stuff I’ve seen over the years, here’s a mild example), plus look at the form of these so-called misandric slurs –

They see wife batterers, rapists, street gang members and privileged misogynists.

Accepting that sweeping generalisations achieve little but make a sweeping generalisation, (as far as I’m aware ‘all tories are tossers’ usually passes the commenting policy, not that it adds much to the discussion) is there any particular reason why being a wife batterer, a rapist, a street gang member or a privileged misogynist shouldn’t be frowned upon?
As opposed to the misogynistic slurs of ‘slut’ or ‘slag’?

This is what frames the debate, the ‘battlefield’ if you will is uneven, misandry decries men for the past (and often present) crimes against women, misogyny decries women for not behaving as demanded/expected. For that reason I remain unconvinced that the commenting policy needs to change on this basis, however it’s ultimately not my decision to make.

@ Chaise Guevara

Similarly you seem to be dismissing Emma’s experiences on a technicality.

And yes, in a large website mostly filled with women you will find some misandry. But it’s how much. And there is just much too much, and it’s supposed to be a site for parents, about parenting. In short I think the oft-childless radfems should have their own site and leave Mumsnet to be a site for parenting and more – and ‘hate speech’ dealt with and repeat offenders banned. I think F4J targeting M&S is a good way to publicise their cause (I am in no way affiliated with F4J btw) and wake people up to the reality of Mumsnet, which is pretty nasty (about men and boys) much of the time.

“is there any particular reason why being a wife batterer, a rapist, a street gang member or a privileged misogynist shouldn’t be frowned upon?”

The point is the member is saying that she and other Mumsnetters see all men, even though they are doing nice things, like this. Can’t understand why, her post is a little incoherent, but the question was how much man-bashing is there on Mumsnet, and I posted evidence just from one thread. Yes, there is rampant misogyny elsewhere on the net, but Mumsnet isn’t just any old website, is it? It’s got clout, it’s supposed to for parents and parenting, and if the misogynist stuff you can find regularly turned up on a very popular site for fathers, with advertising from M&S etc… I think it would be news, I think women would campaign to get those ads stopped in a very similar way to how F4J have acted.

@135 Would it surprise you to learn that all mainstream dating advice for women essentially assumes that the man they’re about to go on a date with is a potential rapist until proven otherwise and that they should take several steps before commencing the date (and on the date) to ensure their own safety and give them plenty of avenues of escape?

137. Vicki Wharton

Fathers for Justice hate women and children speaking of their experiences at the hands of some men. That’s why they have launched this attack, as a way of silencing the victims of real gender hatred and driving the issue underground again. Well done FfJ, every act you undertake shows why courts and mothers don’t want you anywhere near children, you’d rather bully people into silence than engage with reality. Not a very good tendency in a parent.

138. Vicki Wharton

If you’re telling the truth about a rape you have undergone, that doesn’t make you a man hater, and simply tackling the subject of rape doesn’t make Mumsnet a misandrist organisation. The truth is reality and has no bias.

@ Vicki

The problem, if a “rape” occurred, then yes it should be reported to the police and dealt with as a crime in a criminal court.

What normally happens is men go to court for access to their children. It is at that point the rape, domestic violence, abuse, torture, controlling gets reported, not to the police but an untrained cafcass oficer whos first kneejerk reation is to safe gaurd the child. The now distraught man is if any given limited access to his child.

It takes from 2 – 15 years to realise it wasn’t true. During which time the child is now a stranger. Case closed.

If these crimes were so hideous why we’re they never reported to the police? Why are these crimes being dealt with in a family court where they are clearly not capable of dealing with it. Almost every woman in family court has an element in her statement that is untrue and is enough to keep the father at bay. That is wicked and evil and she, when found out should be held in contempt.

If you’re a man and you have committed the above attrosities then you deserve all you get. Thankfully not all men are the same.

@ Vicki

Solicitors are aware that a crime if true has been committed, how come they never advise their clients to go to the police? It’s because from a very early stage in the proceedings they know it’s not true. The longer the case runs the more money they’ll get.

Simples

@139 Why are they never reported to the police? For a variety of cumulative reasons, the physiological impact of the attack, the sociological impact of the press’s preference for false claims to real cases, a desire to just move on with your life and not have your sexual history paraded about the courtroom as though you were the one on trial, a desire to not have to remember that moment in detail. What do you think was the bleeding point of Mumsnet’s rape awareness campaign in the first place?

142. Chaise Guevara

@ 131 emma

No. Just no. If someone’s wrong, demonstrate why this is. What you’re attempting is called “ad hominem”. People on this site are not going to fall down and bow before you just because you demand special debating rights.

Has it not occurred to you that the people you imperiously declare to have a “right” to speak are all in one specific interest group that is going to have a very particular take on this issue?

Oh, and banging on about your freedom of speech after telling other people that they have no right to comment? Fucking hilarious.

143. emma Jones

142 chaise.
I will not get into a debate to people who have nothing better to do than swear, there are other words in the dictionary ! I guess I hit a raw nerve.

144. Chaise Guevara

@ 134 Dan

“Similarly you seem to be dismissing Emma’s experiences on a technicality.”

Emma makes it clear that she is not interested in a rational debate; instead she wants us all to agree with her just because she’s her and oh so special. I don’t like people like this, and if she has no respect for anyone else, why should I bother to respect her? On top of that, her experiences are anecdotal even if her account can be trusted. This is not a convincing line of argument. There’s nothing really there to answer.

Also, I’m allergic to exclamation marks, so Emma’s posts bring me out in a rash.

“And yes, in a large website mostly filled with women you will find some misandry. But it’s how much. And there is just much too much, and it’s supposed to be a site for parents, about parenting.”

What’s your basis for this claim? Examples alone wouldn’t do it.

“In short I think the oft-childless radfems should have their own site and leave Mumsnet to be a site for parenting and more”

Probably, but that’s up to them, and they won’t do it.

“and ‘hate speech’ dealt with and repeat offenders banned.”

See, this is getting a bit censorious for my liking. If you don’t like the comments on the forum, pick another one. I can’t side with someone who thinks views they disagree with should be outlawed.

“I think F4J targeting M&S is a good way to publicise their cause (I am in no way affiliated with F4J btw) and wake people up to the reality of Mumsnet, which is pretty nasty (about men and boys) much of the time.”

Based on my brief experience, there’s a far higher ratio of misogyny on F4J than there is misandry on Mumsnet. But how is Mumsnet itself nasty about males? Are you talking about any specific campaigns or editorials? Or are you again randomly holding the site to account for the views of its members?

Mumsnet is not the court room. Cafcass are not trained in criminal law if at all. this is exactly the reason why this system is messed up. If the criminal act has happened and it is true. the police in this country take it very seriously, and i am assured that they will follow up any and all crimes committed. what we’re talking about is access to children, and a lot of the time the crime has not been committed to them. but for some feral, some women go into default mode, close there eyes and run, screaming out anything that will get them a reaction. This is not justice, not at all.

In summary. If its true tell the authorities, (MUMSNET is not included) they will deal with it. if its true he’ll be reprimanded for his crime. it is not for you to punish him or take the law into your own hands. What you’re suggesting is anarchy, say what you want and get away with it. and if we (Men) question it, woe betide anyone that gets in the way.

Is that is justice?
We all know what should happen. Whats is happening is wrong. It doesn’t work, but it works for some women, and they will do anything to keep it that way

146. Chaise Guevara

@ 143 emma

Oh gosh no, not SWEARING! I mean, demanding special debating rights and arrogantly dismissing people who disagree with you as “not entitled to an opinion” is all well and good, but saying naughty words is right out!

147. Missile Smile

@cylux 133.

“For some reason, on any online discussion featuring a mixture of both sexes should the OP be about issues specifically relating to women there’s always a movement toward discussing a related, even if tenuously, subject that centres on men”

I think one of the reasons for this is that issues that affect men are rarely written about ‘above the line’ and when they are they’re usually not ‘about’ the issue but critical of an element involved in it (as above). So I’m sympathetic to the movement you describe above. I think frustration is heightened when what is being written about is an issue that men and women are both victims and perpetrators of (such as domestic violence, online abuse etc.) but are presented in such a way that only focuses on female victims and male perpetrators.

Chaise, you want me to further prove that Mumsnet has too much misandry going on, but examples don’t count? Yet your brief experience of F4J is evidence that there is more misogyny there than there is misandry on mumsnet? Ok, bye.

149. Chaise Guevara

@ 148 Dan

“Chaise, you want me to further prove that Mumsnet has too much misandry going on, but examples don’t count?”

It’s anecdotal. Based on how this thread’s gone so far I thought there was a high chance of people post 20-odd anecdotes as “proof” that misandry at Mumsnet is endemic.

“Yet your brief experience of F4J is evidence that there is more misogyny there than there is misandry on mumsnet?”

No. It was me who pointed out that my comment was based on brief experience, explicitly to make it clear that this shouldn’t be taken as a solid factual statement.

“Ok, bye.”

Yeah, don’t let the door hit your arse.

Fathers for justice supporters, you can posture here as much as you like but your members break the law (invading house of commons, buckingham palace etc), I’ve heard various reports of members writing threatening letters to women’s aid and other dv charities. And what was that I heard about your ‘say no to lesbo dads’ campaign?

As someone said above, if you care so much about parental access, join the feminist battle to have equal parental leave and an end to gender discrimination, instead of spouting your nasty misogyny.

I wondered how long be before mumsnet appeared.

Protest, campaigne, uprising even. Bringing injustice into the public domain.
Putting right, wrongs. How can you object to positive change,? Nobody hates you, we hate the system that’ll rip a family apart. It sounds like your in favour of that.

152. Vicki Wharton

139. Mark
In answer to why women do not go to courts with regard to gender based violence my experience might be informative: my ex hit me when I refused to put on a jumper he deemed necessary to do the gardening. He threw a glass at me, then a table and when I withdrew to the bedroom ended up sitting on my chest punching me in the head. The police were called by a neighbour and the policeman attending listened to my exes story and then began berating me for ‘fighting’ with my partner. When I pointed out under English law I have the right to defend myself he looked nonplussed. When I then reviewed the physical evidence round the flat and pointed out how it backed my version of events he backed off further and finally the police arrested my ex. I told my ex I would withdraw my statement if he attended a DV course, which his solicitor advised him against as it would be an admission of guilt. The social services interviewed me but not my partner, and then told me that as I had refused to give up my home and move into a hostel, that if he hit me again my daughter would be put on the at risk register. When I tried to make a formal complaint about the policeman attending my exs attack on me the police kept me waiting in Streatham Police Station for four hours whilst they came up with one excuse after another as to why they couldn’t record my complaint. The IPCC who I went to afterwards stated that as I hadn’t complained within a year of the event the police had no case to answer, despite the fact I could prove that I’d visited the police station 3 months after the attack to complain. Mumsnet is allowing women the chance to record their experiences of gender hatred and violence in light of many women having experiences at the hands of the authorities much like myself. Simply recording their experience of violence at the hands of a man doesn’t make the victim a man hater – but it seems many on here think these victims experiences should be suppressed. I cannot see that would be a good thing for either the women or children subjected to this gender orientated violence.

@ Vicki

I am truly sorry to hear about your traumatic experience.

So where do we turn to for help when our lives turn to ####.?

You went to the authorities, as did I, and neither one of us found justice, we both met incompetence.

We then turn to our Internet buddies, barrack room lawyers. They then feed off of our grief. Pitting us against each other in venomous attacks, where actually nobody wins. Both sides have valid points of view and to some degree both sides are prone to being hijacked by extremist. Setting that aside how do we move forward? Perhaps a judicial body voted in by members of both sides, scrutinised by both sides for the greater good, our kids. Not to score points and win arguments but to compromise. Not based on social services not based on Cafcass or the courts, but a mutually bonding agreement. That is recognised by both sides .

I’m just spitballing here, but there is a way, a system that can work. If we focus our energy on that, we can then change the world.

Note. If a crime has been committed it should not be ignored of forgotten, and that also needs to be reformed.

154. Vicki Wharton

153. Mark
Thank you for your compassion Mark, I must admit I didn’t expect that :-). I think we start by dismantling sexism, which is the base of all gender violence and gendered expectations of role. I think we include mandatory childcare/good parenting courses at school for boys and girls so that both genders know one end of a baby from another and what they are in effect signing up to when they have unprotected sex. I think we need men’s magazines to take a far less abusive approach to women and children and to cease talking about them as a contemptuous burden which is kind of cool to abuse (and remove the ‘but I’m just being ‘ironic” cloak). I think we need shared parental leave 6 months her, 6 months him, compulsory, so that men share the burden of childcare as well as the joys and I think we need to teach the 10 commandments in school as citizenship rather than religion so that we instill respect for others as well as oneself regardless of religious or non religious belief. It seems looking at the internet trolls that there are a legion of people who mistake freedom of speech for freedom to abuse and abuse is the forerunner of violence. Those are my thoughts.

@154 You do know the first five commandments are about worshipping God and no one else, not exclaiming ‘Jesus Christ!’ and not working on a Sunday, right? There’s no real way of separating them from religion.

Make no judgements where you have no compassion. we love and want to see are children

Sigh.

It’s just so…silly. As far as I can work out, they are basing their anti mumsnet campaign on a total lack of understanding of how a forum works. Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the whole thing, taking words out fo context from anything, never mind a huge constantly active forum (mumsnet has two million unique users a month, all of whom have their own views, agenda, style of writing and life) is going to say whatever you want it to say. Ridiculous.

Then add in that they have chosen to attack one of the biggest online spaces that is mostly women talking about real things, not the fluffy tosh that we are meant to talk about, and it starts to look even sillier.

Mumsnet is not, and never has been, anti men. Some posters have had a hard time in previous relationships, and often the ex partner was a nasty piece of work. Because Mumsnet is mostly women, and because most women like to have relationships with men, most of the nasty exes are men. That doesn’t mean that Mumsnet as a whole hate men as a whole. It is just basic logic.

Sigh. We’ve had two posts up about this on The Camel’s Hump – one in defence of Mumsnet in general: http://camelshump.co.uk/2012/03/19/in-defence-of-mumsnet/ and one about divorce and Fathers for Justice: http://camelshump.co.uk/2012/03/20/the-blame-game/ and they both have been causing a bit of debate.

Why can’t women be allowed to converse openly and honestly in their own spaces online? And why do F4J think that the utterly ridiculous adverts they are producing will work? What do they actually think will happen, apart from them cheapening their cause even further (although what that cause is seems to change daily) and making it less and less likely that they will be listened to?

Gah. Gah and Meh. Take THAT out of context.

158. Vicki Wharton

155. Cylux
Ok, maybe they need a little revision then! I think the not working one day a week so that families have a day together would still be a good idea though, speaking as an ex shop worker to boot, and the rest as to not lying, stealing, coveting another person’s goods etc would still hold up well as to a set of basic rules for how we treat one another as UK citizens.

And I think that alongside father’s rights needs to be discussion of father’s responsibilities ie that of putting their child’s interests first. That would and should include not attacking, cheating on or lying to the mother which invariably destroys the family unit and is very definitely not in the child’s interests.

I think if everyone had a bit more understanding and compassion for one another are kids would be bought up in a better world, Mothers and fathers parent differently. I have not seen my son for 3 months now and its killing me, I wish my ex would not be so bitter and see what she is doing to are son but with the law being the way it is what can I do. I have to wait till court and just need try to eat, try to sleep, try to get on with life and just hope my sons ok until that day I am in court to see my son. What a crazy world we all live in

160. Vicki Wharton

159. james
Hi James
Am not sure mother’s and father’s parenting styles should differ that much – child first parenting is child first parenting. I can’t comment on your situation but certainly know that in mine, my child’s father simply does not consider how his actions impact on his daughter’s life negatively. Having left us to return to loved up coupledom, he is now pushing for my daughter’s home to be sold from under her so that he can ‘get on with his life’. As well as breaking up the family a week before she started primary school he is now working out the best way of evicting her from her home and removing our main support network of neighbours with kids and very likely her school and my office which will impact on us financially too. Most of the single mums I know are dealing with the same shit from their children’s fathers. Only 12% of absent fathers pay even the basic rate of CSA maintainance regularly – I must admit I think shit parenting is shit parenting, regardless of gender.

hi vicki
mother’s and father’s parenting styles will be slightly different depending on boy or girl, father son, father daughter, mother son, mother daughter. If that’s what you say about your ex then you deserver someone better but you cant have it all. Most people are finding things difficult we need to let go and we all need to take some responsibility are self s, if you think your ex cant parent tell him to bye some books or take a course, talk, understand, and you both might. Say yes to shared and equal parenting.

162. Vicki Wharton

161. james
James, I think you’re missing the point – I don’t think he can’t parent, I know he WON’T parent. I don’t need to say yes to equal parenting – it’s he that doesn’t say yes to it. He didn’t buy or read a single book on pregnancy or parenting and then spent most of our daughter’s early years making dismissive sumnations of mine and her needs without a scrap of knowledge to base that on. When I pointed out to him he wasn’t putting our needs alongside his own or even reading about what our needs might be since he clearly wouldn’t believe what I told him I had read, he hit me. Putting a child’s needs first is not a style of parenting, it is a choice that both parents/genders can make. In his case, he chose not to, and still chooses not to.

Vicki now I get your point can you please understand my point that not every father is the same, I have also found that women like to moan a lot, your case does seems to be severe and I and many fathers are at the compete different end of the scenario, I think people should be fined for not taking any part in there kids life and any reason that interferes with a child’s upbringing men and women, why should I be the one who’s being punished for being a loving and caring father, four fathers have committed suicide this year because of the family law, that’s why I ask people to say yes to equal and shared parenting.

164. Vicki Wharton

James, just because I am talking about my experience doesn’t mean I am tarring you with the same brush, but it does become a little tiring to keep having to answer the not every man is like that. I know that James, but a large amount of them are. Most of the guys that I know even in marriages or partnerships do significantly less work round the house than their partners, do little of the management work of their children’s lives – organising sleep overs, dental appointments etc – and tend to spend an inordinate amount of time lolling about in front of the TV or upstairs on the computer – looking at goodness knows what?!! Do men seriously think its shared parenting to know more about their football team’s latest score than they do about their children’s friends at school or breeding a healthy attitude within themselves to wives, female partners and daughters to spend hours on the computer looking at material that refers to them as bit**es, sl**s and wh**res? My experience isn’t as severe as some women in my daughter’s class who have been raped by their partners – and are now fighting for access to children without having the faintest idea why a mother wouldn’t possibly want to leave her children in the hands of a rapist. Until men start thinking about how their behaviour affects the people around them and asking for information on responsible parenting and partnering in their teenage and upwards magazines, we are largely left with a generation of fathers who got their code of morals towards women and children out of Loaded and Nuts.

Regarding comment 164 Vicki Wharton.

Ms Wharton, I feel that you seem to lack the ability to reason and you are not able to stay focused on the main issues. which are… Fathers should have equal access to thier own children equal to that mothers, pure and simple! You can go on all day describing fathers negativley until the cows come home, as you have done. While some men may act that way, that has little bearing over what the main issues are, as I have already described.. repeat, mothers and fathers should have equality in law accessing thier children.

What you describe some men as doing,. raping, violence etc etc has no bearing on what takes place in the Family Courts. Rapists are not tried in the Family Courts. Men or women who have beaten the hell out of thier partners are not prosecuted in the Family Courts. Mothers or Fathers who sexually abuse thier children are not tried in the Family Courts… are you getting my point? Now, all those terrible offences should be dealt with in the Criminal Courts and if found guilty punished severely, no matter what the gender. Then, and only then, does that criminality now play a part in the Family Courts. However, those offences are NOT RE-TRIED in the Family Courts, they dont need to be because a higher court has made a judement on them already The Judge at the Family Courts will NOW take that proven criminal record into account when one of thos parents applies for contact to see thier child, That Judge, however, will not re-convict that applicant for his prevous actions, it is not his place to. What he will do though is probably not allow contact with that child because of the parents previous record of Rape, violence, or what ever it is. Now, this is clear is it not? If such accusations, as we have mentioned, come to light for the first time ONLY at the Family courts, again that accusation is of a criminal nature and therefore the matter should be dealt with at the criminal courts, which is right and proper. Family Court Judges are not there to decide serious matters as these, nor should they be. However, many accusations do arise at Family courts, and it is true that those accusations are used by clever barristers and lawyers to blacken the name of a parent WITHOUT REAL PROOF. (no smoke without fire scenario) And coming to point, this is usually the father, THIS IS WHY WE WANT EQUALITY AND FAIRNESS AND THE PREVENTION OF FALSE, IF THEY ARE FALSE, ACCUSATIONS AT THE FAMILY COURTS. get them sent to the criminal courts instead, but they dont do they? All the issues are here, stop muddying the waters with your constant refrain of… men do that and men do this, and fathers do that and fathers do this. Its obvious you are making it a gender argument, it is far from it! Humans should have equal rights…. note,,,,, HUMANS.

@165 I believe you meant ‘should have equal access to their children, so long as it’s in their children’s best interests for them to do so’.

167. the a&e charge nurse

[166] I believe you meant ‘should have equal access to their children, so long as it’s in their children’s best interests for them to do so’ – if we consider populations it IS in their best interest (see 90).

It is patently unjust that because some fathers are bastards this can then be used to justify a negative disposition (in family court) toward all fathers – how is it any different from other forms of stereotyping such as arriving at preconceived ideas about race, sexual orientation, or skin colour then applying such stereotypes when making legal decisions.

reply to 166.

With respect, I meant exactly what I put and stated, my absolute and ideal meaning was meant in a genderless sense. However the example I put forward was in context about the father, it had to be since they are the ones fighting for equality it would seem and are the main issue and topic here being discussed. Are you therefore suggesting then that your comment “so long as it’s in their children’s best interests” only has application towards the father and not an equal application to the mother also? If it was NOT in the interests of the child to see either parent, who will be doing the parenting? I did make it quite clear that it would obviously not be in the interests of the child if either parent had a criminal record in relation to rape, child abuse or violence to a partner.There can be no room, nor should there be any room made for false accusations that have not been proven as factual, if they are not provable to the standard obtained in a criminal court, then such allegations shoud be ignored as unfounded. Besides these abuses, (and a few more perhaps) I take it for granted that indeed either parent has an equal access in thier loving concern in the interests towards thier child, but equally. I have made it quite clear, unless there is absolute proof, WHY it is not in the childs interests to see a parent, then it should be taken for granted that each parent should be considered in accessing thier child equally.

169. Vicki Wharton

I guess Paul, that when mothers get equal human rights in the criminal courts on gender violence issues is when fathers will get equal rights in the family courts. I couldn’t even begin to take my daughter’s father to court as what would I feed my daughter on and keep a roof over her head once he was found guilty, if indeed he was found guilty? Certainly my experience illustrates what keeps many women from prosecuting male violence is that there is no equality in our so called judicial system, which is why so few women even bother to report rape and sexist violence in the home, they know they will face a barrage of men from policemen through to barristers who are all trying to prove her attacker was justified. This is what this thread was originally about. I would also state that if male media produced articles that educated men into being good partners and fathers rather than the normal line of Loaded and Zoo that thinks its clever to portray women as wh**res and to treat children with indifference or contempt, then you might begin to turn this tide around. There is injustice on both sides, but at least you’re not being punched whilst being discriminated against in the courts too. I am allowed to speak about my experience truthfully, and the disrespect and lack of empathy you show my experience mirrors a vast injustice at the very heart of our society.

comment 167, the charge nurse.

Here here, I couldn’t have put it better myself! Indeed you got the flavour of her comment as much as I did, it was full of gender bias wasn’t it? I agree with your comment entirely, yes some fathers can be bastards, as can some mothers, but that’s besides the point in making governmental new laws in accessing our childeren in the family courts, Actually, the fact that either parent can be bastards has no bearing whatsoever in the making of new laws, either parent has equality in being that bastard, and therefore it should go that either should have equality in contact rights as well. This is not an issue of gender, it is an issue of all humans having equality in everything to do with laws.

REPLY TO 169 Ms Wharton.

Vicky, there are many injustices in our courts the courts need overhauling in total, however we are where we are, until things change. If you have been harmed in any way by your partner, then I am ready to believe you utterly, why shouldn’t I? And you have my sympathies, violence is wrong who ever does it. But do not personalise the issue here Vicky, neither should you be quick to judge me as uncaring or unfeeling. I would fight for the rights of any human that is suffering injustice, you included because we are all equal. I have no leanings to my giving help, be they man or woman. That is just my point here, this is about fair laws for all, not about mean and women.

Also you dont need money to prosecute a rape or if you have been beaten up by your partner, we have the CPS for that, if there is siffeicent evidence they WILL prosecute for you and for the good of justice as a whole, your comment about not being able to afford to take partner to court makes little sense to me, with respect.
I am sorry if you have had a bad time and I am sorry if you have suffered, but this has little to do with equality in the making of our laws. I mean no offence to you love.

@170

Here here, I couldn’t have put it better myself! Indeed you got the flavour of her comment as much as I did, it was full of gender bias wasn’t it?

I think you’ll find that I’m a guy.

@ 170

Opps! My apologies, why on earth did put “her”? Sorry, very. Cringem, cringe, humble pie, slurp, lick. Sorry again.

174. Vicki Wharton

171. Paul Manning
The point I was making Paul love, was that if I proceed as a witness for the CPS and my daughter’s father goes to prison, then I have no one else to help feed my daughter, pay for the gas bills that keep her warm and pay half the mortgage with to keep a roof over her head. Just by giving a statement to the police was enough to ostrocise my daughter’s grandfather and her aunt who have not spoken to me from that day onwards. If women cannot speak of their experiences without coming under vitriolic attack as they have at mumsnet from the likes of Fathers for Justice, then we end up living in the equivalent of a male totalitarian state where we are called liars just for speaking an unpalitable truth. 85% of DV is perpetrated by men so it is a gendered issue, and the criminal courts plus the media push the line that the victim is treated as a liar by virtue of her gender so when it comes down to a her word against his in court, it becomes difficult to successfully prosecute an individual as she is constantly up against a system that says he is innocent until proven guilty, whereas she is guilty (of lying) until she can prove she is innocent. Women, on average, are hit 35 times before they report DV so the evidence is not that they rush to the courts the moment a bloke uses his fists to win an argument over whether he should help with the washing up. And a large number of men do not pay maintainance regularly if at all which constitutes financial abuse of their children. Women bring these issues up at Family Court because of the absence of any justice in the criminal system. Address that if you want to keep violence and financial abuse out of the family system.

@171 Ms Wharton.

Vicky, you wrote: “Address that if you want to keep violence and financial abuse out of the family system.”, I already have addressed it, please see @ 165 and @168 and 171.

If I was to continue I would ony be repeating myself, and indeed repeating myself as a MAN as well, which is what you want. I am not here to be in a defensive position as a man, I am here as a human. As I have said, you keep gendering the issues, I am not here to defend wrong doing either that you will have suffered in the past. I have nothing else to say, but that.

I wish you well and hope you recover from whatever has happened in your life, I can see it has affected you. I live with similliar pain also, from my female ex, however I refuse to see females all in the same way as her. I want the law to change for all humans equally, where all chlildren have the right to see even thier fathers, I am of the belief that fathers are being denied thier equal rights.

My regards Vicky. Paul.

176. Vicki Wharton

175.Mstr Manning
Paul you haven’t addressed the lack of justice I spoke of women experiencing in the criminal system, you have ignored those points. I am not making DV a gendered issue, the fact that the vast majority of humans that use violence to bully others in the family are men is what makes it a gendered issue. You have called me love, implied that the majority of women that speak of experiences of violence in the Family Courts are liars until proved otherwise and then suggested in your last email that my experiences at the hands of my ex has somehow tainted my view of men by my constant perverse habit of returning to the facts that are known of DV and the lack of justice for women in the Criminal Justice System. Speaking as a trained counsellor, I would suggest that your experiences with your ex wife more bearing on this debate than mine, I am just drawing attention to some of the facts known about power relationships between the genders to state that these need to be addressed in order to move forward to dealing with fathers wishes for access to their children.

@176

I am sorry but I am withdrawing from you as I find that all you want to do is repeat yourself time and time again. And it is not for me to explain or to justify or what “some” males do. You can’t seem to focus on the main point in hand and the present cahnges to the law with regard to fathers having equality, I find your arguments weak and judgmental. I resent that you suggest that i have inferred that mothers lie, I have done no such thing and have not “implied that the majority of women that speak of experiences of violence in the Family Courts are liars”. It seems to me that you are not able to read English, I SPOKE OF PARENTS, without gender in refering to the courts. Unless you get out of your mind this idea of genderising the issue you will fail to grasp what is at stake here. I refuse to contine answering you because I can see that you purposely want to misconstrue my meanings, and I have made those very clear! I suggest that you as a counsellor get help, I mean that in sincerity, It would seem to me that you may only reinforce womans fear of men by your extreme ideas of them and your experiences. I have little idea that anything of what you say connects in any way with equality for men. You ought to just come out and say it, “no I dont want men to have equal rights to thier children, because SOME are violent”, at least have the decency to admit it! But God what crazy reasoning you have. I will not come back, I am wasting my time and yours. Be at peace. I will fight on for all HUMANS! (MEN AND WOMEN) bye.

178. Vicki Wharton

177. Paul Manning
Before you go Paul love, perhaps you are not aware of how gendered your comments and arguments are: here’s a few of your best bits:

“However, many accusations do arise at Family courts, and it is true that those accusations are used by clever barristers and lawyers to blacken the name of a parent WITHOUT REAL PROOF. (no smoke without fire scenario) And coming to point, this is usually the father, THIS IS WHY WE WANT EQUALITY AND FAIRNESS AND THE PREVENTION OF FALSE, IF THEY ARE FALSE, ACCUSATIONS AT THE FAMILY COURTS. get them sent to the criminal courts instead, but they dont do they?”

“There can be no room, nor should there be any room made for false accusations that have not been proven as factual, if they are not provable to the standard obtained in a criminal court, then such allegations shoud be ignored as unfounded”

“Here here, I couldn’t have put it better myself! Indeed you got the flavour of her comment as much as I did, it was full of gender bias wasn’t it?”

Thanks for your good wishes about counselling Paul, it was training for that that helped me understand that returning people to the reality of a situation (ie the lack of justice in criminal courts for women suffering gendered violence) is the only way to break down psychological denial of another’s reality in order to reach empathy and hopefully compromise. Go in peace Paul.

I am trying to come to some sort of conclusion why women are fighting so hard to keep fathers away from there children when there are so many loving and caring fathers, is it that they are scared that we might brake up this single mother community, where they have this stay at home life, have there mother meetings everyday, moan about every men out there and how hard there life’s are bringing up the kids and are actually so scared of taking some responsibility and doing a bit of work, I know someone with a 5 year old child and would raver have another kid then go back to work, how said is that. I have added up what my ex earns in benefits and it has come to £13.488 a year that’s more then what a lot of people earn even when working, I think some women can easily persuade other women this is the life to have, and if this society and culture dose not change the stories of violence, sexual abuse and so on will carry on and get worst.

180. Vicki Wharton

179. james
I don’t know any of my single mother friends that doesn’t work outside the home. And having worked both in the workplace and in bringing up my child I would state that both are equally work, one is paid, the other is voluntary but no less hard. Fathersforjustice does not offer any acknowledgement of the gendered nature of violence in the home by a sizeable number of men. Until as a group they stop denying/ignoring the existence of men that abuse partners and children, they will continue to be seen largely as a group that seek to deny sexist violence directed against women and children and therefore part of a system of denial and suppression of many women and children’s real lived experience. Denial doesn’t mean the problem isn’t there and needs to be addressed by both the men perpetrating it and their surrounding community of fathers and men who could condemn their actions rather than ignore them as being a women’s issue. The only woman I know where access is an issue is with a father that uses withholding maintainance and violence as a way of bullying his ex and their child – most other mother’s I know, myself included even with my ex partner’s history – try not to bargain with access as it simply escalates hostility on the part of the father.

@ Vicki

Do you know anyone in Fathers 4 Justice? The clues in the name.
They are not the defenders of violent pedophile rapist. At the risk of repeating myself It’s about equal justice.
Men are naturally different to women and women are different to men. We are on this planet largely due to that fact. It is those differences that we live for, dress up, get excited, faught wars, fall in love.

Your point of view is yours to keep.

I would bet that for as many dislikes you had with your ex, there was a point where you were in love and he had good points, I would also bet that if he were on this forum he could list a similar number of dislikes.

The point is how he chooses to love or not love his child is not for you to control. But for you to accept. You chose him, you made that decision. Now the relationship has faltered you’re now blaming all men for the failure. Much like the court system running today.

For example if a dog bit you, should all dogs be put down?

I could say the same about my ex, but it won’t stop me looking for love, and hope the next one fairs better. Isn’t that what life is about.

There are pot holes in life, some deeper than others. Together we can ride it out, blaming each other for the bumpy ride is not helping.

182. Vicki Wharton

Mark, as a mother, if my ex is psychologically abusive to my daughter that IS my job to control. I am her parent and I will defend her safety and her sanity to my dying breath. He has not read one book on child development or psychology and thinks bumbling around treading all over her basic rights covers his arse of responsibility for his actions. If he dismisses her feelings and her human rights merely because she is a child, that is my job as her co parent to first point that out to him that all human beings have some basic human rights enshrined by law, and if he continues not respecting her basic rights, for me to protect her from his abuse. That is the law, both legal and moral.

@181 Apparently one of the dislikes her ex will list is ‘didn’t put on a jumper when I told her too’. See comment 152
There’s no escaping that one I’m afraid Mark, in Vicki’s case the danger that her ex represents to his own child is blatant.

184. Vicki Wharton

183. Cylux
Thank you for stepping in Cylux, sometimes its nice to know that someone out there is following the logic! x

185. Vicki Wharton

Just one final general point to make, does anyone else find it interesting how a pack of pro Father’s4Justice will badger a woman to uphold the rights of a violent and ignorant man and will totally ignore the reality and potential danger of this no matter how many times the women points out examples of his violence, but when a man makes the case, they subside… hmm …

186. terry walsh

i am a father,was a dad,fell foul of the mother and the injustice of the family court.took 5 years,mediation,court,crown..by the 3rd year i had seen the last and soon to hear the last of my children, 10 years now…i for one was shocked at the lengths my ex went to and it was a different person full of hatred but never ever told me she hated me..what she hated was my children loving me and that was my downfall.she has done things i donrt know about as well as some i do know, and she was good,in the worse sense..i have to say a good word for mediation, they gave a glowing truthful report on dad, and shortly after getting my wopping 4hours once a fortnight they wrote to the court advising that the children would benefit greatly with more than 4 hours, thank you,it was not your fault i was used and abused..the actual non compliance by the mother to keeping to the court order was only matched by the non interest of the court, over the whole 5 years, to even say a quiet word to the mother allthough she even stopped turning up, but they made me pay a month towards costs but good knows what they did? i am on medication and its helping me to get some of this hurt out but believe me you are turned into a hollow shell and its never going to end untill i go, cameron the fucking coward is a non leader, and what he said on fathers day i have and keep asking him to answer me ‘why’? he said some things that are beyond my comprehension as far as ‘prime minister’ just said it..then you have the groups start up and although i never joined i think its all for the cause..but then it gets to splinter groups, just like people who like religion hopping, george bush is one..which means the hymn books have the same covers but different words so it comes down to ‘which one for me’? i think the only way to get it sorted is for all those who have been affected by the family courts injustice (if they are not allready jailed by the faceless liars) all the groups plus friends family sypmathisers,empathisers,wales,scotland,northern ireland,etc, and get a name that is neutral but says a lot more by having the numbers,..i read for a while about ‘so and so’ dont agree with this or that and its fucking childish! its all about our children being so easilly accessible by a fucking evil greedy sadistic judicicial system that is beyond human..it really is looking like that to me and ok,my kids are adults now and i lost the love of my life but i care about ‘THEIR FUTURES’ because i am dad and i worship them forever..good luck seems a sick joke but its not MATT..O’CONNER..


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. *sigh* | quantumvaleat

    [...] http://liberalconspiracy.org/2012/03/16/fathers4justice-launch-bizarre-attack-on-mumsnet/ [...]

  2. Fathers 4 Justice Protest Sexism, Gender Hatred using Sexism, Gender Hatred | Gossipian

    [...] protest group Fathers 4 Justice (F4J) have launched an advertising campaign in the Independent’s iPaper against the parenting forum and biscuit enthusiasts Mumsnet. F4J [...]

  3. Rhodri

    really sad, fathers rights are an important issue, but this advert is deranged http://t.co/Iwv6qInK

  4. Super Pennie

    Really?? RT @pseudodeviant:LOL-Fathers4Justice launch silly attack on Mumsnet | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/1kFQlelN how did I miss this?

  5. Alice Harvey

    really sad, fathers rights are an important issue, but this advert is deranged http://t.co/Iwv6qInK

  6. Andy King

    really sad, fathers rights are an important issue, but this advert is deranged http://t.co/Iwv6qInK

  7. London Dare2Care

    I believe the acronym is WTF? RT @profanityswan RT @libcon: Fathers4Justice launch bizarre attack on @MumsnetTowers http://t.co/DFTP5n5N

  8. London Dare2Care

    really sad, fathers rights are an important issue, but this advert is deranged http://t.co/Iwv6qInK

  9. London Dare2Care

    IT'S STARTED. RT @libcon: Fathers4Justice launch bizarre attack on Mumsnet http://t.co/WrZIhT3j

  10. London Dare2Care

    Really?? RT @pseudodeviant:LOL-Fathers4Justice launch silly attack on Mumsnet | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/1kFQlelN how did I miss this?

  11. clive crooks

    really sad, fathers rights are an important issue, but this advert is deranged http://t.co/Iwv6qInK

  12. Lorna Leeson

    really sad, fathers rights are an important issue, but this advert is deranged http://t.co/Iwv6qInK

  13. Hive

    All you need to know about fathers4justice: http://t.co/9zqhKznn (from @libcon)

  14. Monica Masson

    really sad, fathers rights are an important issue, but this advert is deranged http://t.co/Iwv6qInK

  15. Sarah L Cheverton

    Yep. That'll show the world what loving & caring fathers you are. What woman wouldn't want you near her or her kids? http://t.co/56XVZ0TF

  16. Heather Clark

    Yep. That'll show the world what loving & caring fathers you are. What woman wouldn't want you near her or her kids? http://t.co/56XVZ0TF

  17. Andrew

    @AliceSmurf http://t.co/kABRikHs

  18. Get Labour Out

    It appears @sunny_hundal is in fact a closed minded bigot http://t.co/AS4LzxLZ #LibCON

  19. sunny hundal

    It appears @sunny_hundal is in fact a closed minded bigot http://t.co/AS4LzxLZ #LibCON

  20. Get Labour Out

    Had a lot of respect for @sunny_hundal but it seems to have been a complete waste http://t.co/WqwiX4g4 #NoResearch #NoIdea

  21. Michael Bater

    Fathers4Justice launch silly attack on Mumsnet | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/iU40xN4q via @libcon

  22. Ed Kelly

    So @sunny_hundal "Right – but you are happy to generalise about all the men on F4J though?" http://t.co/hx0hQGN9

  23. United Kingdom Mumsnet and M&S (Marks Spencers) with F4J

    [...] @ 1. Kieran. Some ex husbands never see their children, and as a result, they commit SUICIDE !!! Fathers4Justice launch silly attack on Mumsnet | Liberal Conspiracy God kept His word and sent His Prophet in this day. Judgement is coming, time is fast [...]

  24. Dads Arms

    really sad, fathers rights are an important issue, but this advert is deranged http://t.co/Iwv6qInK

  25. Emma-Jane

    I believe the acronym is WTF? RT @profanityswan RT @libcon: Fathers4Justice launch bizarre attack on @MumsnetTowers http://t.co/DFTP5n5N

  26. The end of the handyman

    [...] is wrong in all its forms……… It's good to see lefty bile challenged on a lefty website: Fathers4Justice launch silly attack on Mumsnet | Liberal Conspiracy Great Bumper Stickers of the World, #27: Without Men – Civilization Would Last Until The [...]

  27. Fathers4Justice

    IS GENDER HATRED REALLY SILLY? Especially when it separates so many children from their fathers? These guys think… http://t.co/Yf8J4nkb

  28. menznet

    IS GENDER HATRED REALLY SILLY? Especially when it separates so many children from their fathers? These guys think… http://t.co/Yf8J4nkb

  29. London Dare2Care

    IS GENDER HATRED REALLY SILLY? Especially when it separates so many children from their fathers? These guys think… http://t.co/Yf8J4nkb

  30. Babyville

    Fathers4Justice launch silly attack on Mumsnet | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/VTB1LE6M via @libcon

  31. Clareville

    Fathers4Justice launch silly attack on Mumsnet | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/VTB1LE6M via @libcon





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.