It is interesting how we get so obsessed with gender politics instead of looking at the individual cases on their own merit.

There was a father in the US a while back who ran off with his children to avoid his wife gaining full custody. The reason being her lack of care as a mother, some continuing drug isues and other reasons that contributed to her not being a fit mother (I cannot remember them all). The children in this case wanted to stay with their father and said so to the Judge but the ruling went the other way.

Can you blame the father in this case for wanting to protect his children? When interviewed, the children supported their dad's decision to essentially kidnap them.

Most reasonable people would agree even if they disagreed with his tactics, but given the long winded journey through the legal system one can understand his motives.

The trouble is we can all comment on these cases (and we do) without really knowing all the back stories and the people involved.

Most divorced couples now share custody. In the past it was mothers that were given custody because of traditional expectations just as men were paid more for doing the same job because it was expected they had to support a family.

We can all live in the past and some posters can dump their bitterness on all women without rational thought or at least attempting to see the view from the other side.

What 'feminist' on OLO has said fathers should not see their children more than every second weekend?

No, it is much more fun to wallow in self-pity than to get out there and look at what changes have occurred in child custody arrangements.

Pelican,
"Most divorced couples now share custody"

Statistics please.

Also, there seems to be a problem.

For some decades we have had all these social scientists, feminists and various hangers on running around in universities, with their arms constantly ssttrreettcchhiinngg out for that taxpayer’s dollar, but nothing seems to be getting any better.

We have one in four households now a single person household (and increasing). The rates of fatherless children are not decreasing. The rates of homelessness seem to be increasing, and we actually had a homeless person receiving the OOA recently. We also have a father having to ride a bicycle 6,000 km trying to find his child, because the police couldn’t be bothered looking for the mother who had broken the law.

So all these social scientists, feminists and various hangers on running around in universities, endeavoring to change society for the better, have been a total failure.

So, can you nominate an area where these people have been successful, and society is actually improving.

I don’t know of any.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10994#183099

Severin? fractelle?

Any female widow, would for her own benefit, without a shadow of doubt, be better off, having her own parents move into her home while she goes through the painful process of grieving.

The "Maternal Grandfather" would then be available to provide a "Male" role model for her children, in the absence of their dead biological father. This role could also be fulfilled by her brothers, her dead husband's father, uncles and brothers, etc.

However, in recent decades, the "Politically Correct Thought Police" have discouraged the healthy involvement of extended families or shock, horror, the local church community, in family welfare in favour of taxpayer funded "Social Talkers", (they are not workers, nothing they say or do, ever works or benefits children, your own research shows that child abuse & neglect has become an exponentially growing, publicly funded spectator sport over the last 5 decades as a direct result of Fe"Man"Nazism)

The best way for any people with issues to work through them, is to be able to share them with other people who have been through the same difficulties. Once upon a time widows of both sexes were encouraged to socialise with each other. This gave them all shoulders to cry on, without it costing the taxpayers anything.

Sooner or later they could move on and usually with each other.

A healthy win win situation, but that does not provide an excuse to whinge about the need for more social talkers does it?

BTW, while we are on the subject of vilification, radical fauxmanista's, are still to this day, implying or flat out stating that all men are, etc, with rubbery figures, etc, with little or no correction from you or any of your sista's in da hood.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10994#183105

AbuseVictims, correct, but 99% of the single mothers in this poverty are there because they voluntarily chose to live that way, encouraged by Fe"Man"Nazi paedophiles, to live on welfare, or leave good men, for no reason other than boredom, laziness in marriages, or the big screen TV bonus.

vanna

Unless a father has died children are not fatherless. Shared custody and greater access ensures time spent with both mother and father. By your interpretation children are also then motherless. Being a parent is more than just about who lives with the children most of the time.

Many children are fatherless because dad has run off and decided not to be involved in their children's lives. How is that the fault of feminism or university academics. When a man is deserted by his wife and left with the kids he is made into a hero - "what a great dad", "he is doing it tough on his own" but the same hero status is not afforded to single mothers. In fact they are pilloried.

The improvements in society are that men and women have more choices, women are not seen as inferior mentally nor treated as second class citizens. Men now have more rights in regard to shared parenting. How can that be a bad thing? Shared parenting (SP) does not work for all children and while SP should be the starting point each case should be judged on an individual basis.

Cont/...

The reason why we have more single parent households (men are also single parents when they divorce) is that people are less likely to work at their marriage as in the past. Marriage meant forever even if it meant coping with physical or mental abuse. People are now less likely to put up with this sort of behaviour and rightly so. People have also become selfish and the 'me me' society probably has not helped men and women find contentment in the marriage home when things become difficult and the gloss has worn off.

The outcome should always be what is best for the children and usually this is involvement with both parents, but not always. It has been found that some women are now hesitant to report violent behaviour, lest they be accused of false claims in relation to custody issues which, as it came out, was relevant in that case where the father heartlessly threw his daughter off a bridge. Do you think a history of violence (either mother or father) should be taken into account in custody cases?

vanna, how do you think society should be structured? Please tell me what your utopia would look like in relation to gender roles?

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10994#183121

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10994#183129

Severin, twice, i do understand that after 5 decades of indoctrination by the "Politically Correct Thought Police" you would have some difficulty believing anything said by a fair, reasonable man like Vanna. So how about i treat you to some links, peer reviewed by world renowned academics from both sides.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8630135369495797236#

http://www.savethemales.ca/000185.html

http://www.henrymakow.com/australian_satanist_exposes_wo.html

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/7962804/mum-charged-over-pot-smoking-toddler-video

With a couple of bonuses thrown in, but the first 2 are best.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10994#183130

No, Cornflower, almost all of the Fe"Man"Nazi leadership were loony, lefties, or lesbians, or mentally ill, or all of the above.

And the average woman sat back & let their husbands, sons, fathers, brothers, be vilified because they thought they were gaining some advantage, in the "battle of the sexes", which was started by communists to destabilise, modern western capitalist democracy.

Its the ultimate, "divide & conquer" strategy, (been around for thousands of years) women fell for it, but men did not, women still don't want to believe it, even when presented with evidence.

Kinda says something about the real, physical, difference in brain size, (roughly 15%), between men & women doesn't it?

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10994#183142

o sung wu, sorry to disappoint you but when it comes to marriage breakdown the stats show that more than 90% of the failures are down to "her", as well as the neglect & abuse of children.

Despite 15 years involvement in the men's movement, i have never met, 1 single, abusive husband or father, thousands who have been falsely accused, but not 1 who ever did it.