Posted by Antiseptic, Friday, 19 February 2010 6:59:00 AM

" ... Are you aware you give the impression of a neurotic individual who just doesn't like men ... "

Again, you are making things up to support your assertions, and in this case, clearly it is a matter about which you are obviously incorrect. I am a male and very content being so. I have a number of very close male friends and attend regular "boys only" parties. As opposed to being a Doctor of the Mind , you are perhaps a person in need of a bit of therapy, and ought consider the fact that your behaviors could be having an adverse effect on your kids, though I come to suspect that you are not being entirely honest with us about your own situation.

" ... despite the best efforts of the mother to paint me as "violent", which is the standard tactic of third-rate lawyers in the FLA, ... "

Lawyers do not make a practice (for the most part) of going into court without evidence and or with an intent to mislead.

Whilst I admire tenacity, do you I think perhaps that you are in denial about the real reasons that you lost your family?

cotter:"Section 121 of the FL Act prevents me from naming, for your personal edification, women so affected by abusive court decisions. "

Which is why the FCA publishes its cases on austlii with changed names.

I challenge you to find a single one to support your claim that women are punished for raising allegations. Just one...

Children are most definitely heard in the FCA. My own children's wishes were listened to and heard, which was one of the main reasons for the orders.

cotter:"your version vascillates between 'we had 50-50, and be damned if I wus gunna pay a cent more than she did',"

Oh dear, you're not very clever, are you dear? Must be all that testosterone...

My ex sought over 5 years and several court cases to increase her custody and at the same time lodged several "Change of Assessment" applications with the CSA to try to increase her take from me. she eventually stopped after the last matter was decided because Legal Aid declined further funding on the grounds that she had no sustainable claim.

Since then we have had shared care and it has worked well for the past 5 years or so.

Simple really, so you's best look up ChazP and see if she's managed to find anyone to explain the last simple thing I discussed.

cotter:"my cases are current, now, today."

Except you haven't been able to provide any cases at all, have you? It doesn't matter how recent your hallucination is, it's still just in your own head...

Dream on:"I have no time for my bio father whatsoever"

And you accuse me of "projecting"...

Antiseptic: <"Children are most definitely heard in the FCA. My own children's wishes were listened to and heard, which was one of the main reasons for the orders.">

Yet I believe that contradicts some information that you posted previously. You once described how your 5 year old daughter wouldn't open the door for you because she was afraid you'd hurt her; you blamed your ex I think for that and that you couldn't visit home and school when you wanted.

I am sorry Antiseptic, but I believe that Cotter and DreamOn are trying to help you here. Me too.

Pynchme:"You once described how your 5 year old daughter wouldn't open the door for you because she was afraid you'd hurt her"

I said no such thing. Stooping to outright lies is beneath even you. As for not being able to visit the ex's home or school, that was because I was slapped with an interim DVO, based on an affidavit which contained not a single instance of actual violence, as the very nice police DVLO who gave it to me was quite happy to tell me.

An interim DVO is that it does not require an actual violent incident to justify being issued. All it takes is a woman saying "I feel scared", and as you have already told us that feelings are irrelevant, you must agree that is pretty flimsy grounds. It then has all the force of a Court-issued order until a Court rules otherwise.

I note that the lesser lights of the "women with testosterone" brigade are still on their "antiseptic's a man and he has equal custody so he must be an extra superduper bastard" kick.

Have fun dears. While you're trawling the rather limited depths of your imagination in an effort to slander me, kids are still 6 times more likely to be harmed if given to a single mum than a single dad. My own kids have never been abused, neglected or assaulted in any way except by the nasty efforts of their mother to drag their father through the muck.

Given that most of you make your living out of having a constant supply of victims to milk, it's hardly surprising you're desperate to have the kids given to single mum.

Talk about putting the fox in charge of the henhouse...

<"Pynchme:"You once described how your 5 year old daughter wouldn't open the door for you because she was afraid you'd hurt her"

I said no such thing. Stooping to outright lies is beneath even you.">

<"pynchme:"If people are married, and the woman leaves -why would she need to pretend to be in danger or hurt?"

Because if she does so, she can get an enormous amount of additional State-provided assistance to victimise the former spouse. try having police called because you try to visit your child's school - that happened to me. Try being at work and having the police turn up "to investigate a complaint". that happened to me too. Try arriving to give your child a birthday present and having that 5 year-old child refuse to open the door "because Mummy says you might hurt me", with Mum hiding just out of sight. Also happened to me.

As I have said repeatedly and as the Court finally accepted, there was no violence ever perpetrated by me, just mutually raised voices in argument. No threats were made, no hand was ever raised.">

etc

Posted by Antiseptic, Monday, 15 June 2009 6:27:08 AM

I wish I didn't have to push your own words at you Antiseptic. I remembered our earlier exchange when you were describing your separation situation earlier in this thread.

However, while remarks about your own situation are harmful to yourself and I wish you didn't suffer so through your own obstinacy; the unfounded comments you repeat often about single mothers and your opinion that child sexual abuse is a rare event are worse because they harm others, for no reason other than your desire for revenge.

Like another poster (Cotter I think), I can't talk about cases, but I see people every day who have experienced child sexual abuse. About 5 % of boys and girls suffer terribly because of it. As long as you keep advocating to hide it on behalf of people who perpetrate, it will be unlikely to stop.

Pynchme - you have to realise that it is perfectly legitimate for men to intimidate women and children, so long as they don't use actual physical violence. How else are we going to keep them in line?

Hell, without the lurking spectre of violence in the background, we might have to talk to and negotiate with them. It would be the end of the traditional family.

Of course, we only rarely actually "raise a hand" to our errant spouses. I don't know why you feminists make such a fuss ;)