The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Towards Better Outcomes for Children > Comments

Towards Better Outcomes for Children : Comments

By Charles Pragnell, published 2/12/2010

The Howard Family Law (Shared Parenting) Act 2006 treated children as chattels. It had to go.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 10
  7. 11
  8. 12
  9. Page 13
  10. All
I went and looked up the gatekeeper thing in wiki to get a quick rundown. Never heard of it before but it is what I would call a control freak.

With my ex I felt I exhibited a lot of the things described - and realized years later with new partner that I wasn’t that person at all... in fact almost dangerously the complete opposite.

A judge suggested to me once that after living with someone a long time that perhaps we have to take responsibility for parts of who they are. Blind leading the blind far as I could see, we had started living together at 15 and 16 and split in our not quite mid 20’s.

Is this Gatekeeping thing usually considered maternal – Wiki says “typically the mother”.

If one is a gatekeeper that does seem to mean the other adult was just fine with it and that makes them a victim or just rather passive and submissive? Did the feminists make it up to make traditional mums look bad or the men make it up to make it look like the men are bullied?

I don’t like it and I’d like to know which label making group created it.

The abuse definitions expanding are huge, Australia should be worried but these things just seem to slide by without much fuss. I don’t believe they are about custody battles between parents though, I think they are about a rapidly expanding foster care market.

Yep you’re very right James, throw a whole lot of labels at people, add fear of losing children and all the emotions accompanying a break up and things are going to get messy.

R0bert:” I don't know that there are any easy answers to working with that but trying to understand the risk factors has got to help.”

I think my first suggestion now is remove labels from court vocabulary. And stats, they are an indicator of what might be happening out there but when one woman and one man are standing in court those same stats and labels seem to damage everyone
Posted by Jewely, Wednesday, 8 December 2010 9:45:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jewely "when one woman and one man are standing in court those same stats and labels seem to damage everyone"

I wish we could get rid of them when it comes to dealing with individuals but the reality is we all judge according to what we already think we know. Some make a great effort to try and get past that but many don't.

You had a look at some of the material I put up on child abuse and saw how rarely stepmum's are the guilty party (based on one of your earlier comments).

Have you noticed that none of those supporting these changes have in any way corrected or challenged Chiara's claims at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11331#191920 regarding the involvement of step mum's in child abuse?

The foundation stone of what they are pushing for is the lie that child abuse is mostly something men do, they are rarely as blunt about it as Chiara but it's always there as a subtext. Adding in the DV thing up's the anti on this because they the gender warriors already control public perceptions on that issue.

The piece James referenced earlier in the thread on the failings of a gendered approach to family violence is a good intro to the way that particular game is played.

Given the role claims of DV are been used to support these changes the piece James referenced is relevant to this discussion as well http://domestic-violence.martinsewell.com/DuttonCorvo2006.pdf

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Wednesday, 8 December 2010 10:03:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I’m going to read the pdf on domestic violence, glanced at it and will probably take me a bit of time.

Tell the truth I didn’t want to upset Chiara, obviously some traumatic stuff going on back in their world. So where we are talking about larger groups of truths and lies there is a very individual eye witness account happening that makes all the stats lies where Chiara is from.

Like the 0 – 4 year olds being the top fatalities. This means they got hit hard enough to die I suspect where a 5 – 18 year old survived the same beating. Fatality as the end result is misleading.

One stat that did surprise me was that 40 – 44 year old men are more likely to commit suicide. Up until Benk or Vanna mentioned it I had thought it was teenage boys leading male suicides. But it has been used here in relation to custody battles and I don’t see that connection.

R0bert:”The foundation stone of what they are pushing for is the lie that child abuse is mostly something men do, they are rarely as blunt about it as Chiara but it's always there as a subtext. Adding in the DV thing up's the anti on this because they the gender warriors already control public perceptions on that issue.”

It’s all a bit foul really. The men are pushing hard and I see them using some quite nasty language and tactics on a lot of articles I have read. What they want to achieve might be right and correct but the techniques appear to me along the lines of blowing out someone else’s candle to make their own shine brighter. I see the women doing it too.

I can’t tell if it is escalating, I haven’t been watching long enough.

But either way, all I see is the gender warriors using children in this battle rather than really looking for better outcomes for them.

This must make it a National Domestic Argument; Articles and surveys being thrown instead of crockery and door slamming.
Posted by Jewely, Wednesday, 8 December 2010 10:41:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jewely a quick browse of your latest post, I admire your honestly about the maternal gatekeeping.

As to maternal gatekeeping, it perhaps has always been an issue, but never identified, because of the nature of gender roles in the past. Dads went to work and mums ran the house and kids.

But as soon as gender roles change a previous hidden problem arises.
Posted by JamesH, Sunday, 12 December 2010 8:54:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
James:” But as soon as gender roles change a previous hidden problem arises.”

I can only imagine how devastating it would be for a man who has worked hard to support wife and kids to be told later he lacked an emotional connection with his children or be accused of any kind of misdeed when he thought he was doing the right thing.

The woman at home doing the domestic stuff would probably be just as hurt to be told what she thought was her job was really her being a manipulative gatekeeper.

The traditional roles changed and new labels emerged, men and women are being told how bad they are and what group they belong to. I’m sort of starting to understand why benk keeps mentioning universities but that seems to be so a label can be pinned to someone.

Were they problems or have they been created to suit certain agendas? Do I need to go sit and have a chat to my grandparents and let them know who they have really are according to todays stats and the resulting character assignations… I meant to write assassinations and my spell checker gave me that word, it kinda works too
Posted by Jewely, Sunday, 12 December 2010 12:25:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jewely, I think it was Erin Pizzey, but it could have been someone else who wrote that universities were producing social workers, who were political activists.

Books that are worthwhile reading "Who Stole Feminism", Heterophobia and Professing Feminism.

It sounds like you are on the right track.
Posted by JamesH, Sunday, 12 December 2010 3:57:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 10
  7. 11
  8. 12
  9. Page 13
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy