>>the vast majority of social researchers clearly show that children need and do best when raised in a stable married environment by THEIR biological mother and a father. To deny this obvious truth is child abuse.<<

So divorce is child abuse? Then why don't the 'please, won't SOMEBODY think of the children' mob argue against divorce with the same tireless zeal that they devote to arguing against gay marriage? Is it just because their heart isn't really in it? That they don't have the same visceral revulsion for children being raised by step-parents that they do for homosexual relationships of any stripe? Or are they just hypocrites?

Cheers,

Tony

Thanks Warwick for having the moral courage to speak out and cut through all the PC bull! We have feminist governance dominating in politics and bureaucracy and universities controlled by radical feminist ideologues who are hell bent on destroying not only the family but the male sex. Most male politician’s are either feminists or puppets under feminist control, those who are not often dare not speak out.

There is a commonly accepted myth that feminism stands for gender equality (and many of the so called “fun feminists” believe this) but at the true heart of modern feminism (Radical or Gender Feminism) is a doctrine of hate, female supremacy and genderocide.
See http://radicalhub.com/2011/10/04/radical-feminism-in-the-21st-century/ a number of prominent Australian feminist academics contribute to this site some including Shelia Jeffries and Betty McLellan who comfortably peddle hatred under their own names, the others hide behind pseudonyms.

But things are changing and will continue to change as the number alienated fathers, dispossesed, falsely accused, discriminated against and disillusioned men grow in numbers. They talked about a "gender war", but there was no war, men did not show up. Now men are starting to it remains to see what will eventuate, time will tell.

Greg Canning
Townsville

Dont be fooled by Marshs feined courage. He takes on feminists and other topics such as the need to protect women's right to have a wedding, all in order to regain his status after he was sacked for insisting homosexuals are prone to pedophilia in his 21 reasons Why Gender Matters. He talks a lot about weddings, the badness of feminism, and the problem of child abuse ertc only in order to enlist freinds who will excuse his hatred of gays. His scheme has little to do with feminism and very much to do with getting supporters for his hatred of gays.

Why is it that the world's most powerful and influential men's rights forum, A Voice For Men, is strongly against feminism yet embraces homosexuals in its fight against feminist hegemony and social misandry? http://www.avoiceformen.com/

There is nothing morally courageous about hating on gays or speaking out against gay marraige. Nor is it valid to claim that gay marraige is a plot driven only by feminists. this kind of bigotry would not be considered courageous at a voice for Men, and in fact would not be tolerated. Morally courageous men reject bigotry and undeserved hatred against a demographic.

Thanks Warwick, courageous effort to take head on the issues of radical feminism, gay marriage, the underhanded & unilateral repeal of shared parenting reform and the proposed implementation of gender laws in The National Plan to reduce violence against women and their children (not men) all of which lead to the mass criminalisation, incarceration, marginalisation & impoverishment of men as a class.

Hopefully, people are beginning to realise this is part of the agenda of this radical feminist/gay dominated government to abolish gender difference by transforming its institutional source — the patriarchal family.

Militant streams of the Gay Rights movement have combined to take this agenda one step farther. The problem is not just sexism but heterosexism, and the solution is to dismantle not just the patriarchal family but the heterosexual family as such.

“Destroy the family, you destroy society” I.V. Lenin. And a $trillion Carbon Tax provides the means to rebuild it into a big gay friendly androgynous union.

Contemporary feminism has aptly been described as “Marxism without economics,” since feminists replace class with gender as the key social construct. Of course, what society constructs can be deconstructed.

Advocates of same-sex “marriage” present the idea as a civil rights issues, a step forward for tolerance and respect. But recent developments place that interpretation very much in doubt. Gay marriage is not a stand alone policy.Consider the Family Violence (sole custody) amendments to the Family Law Act guillotined through the Senate in the dead of night after the news cycle without bipartisan support or scrutiny for the first time ever in Parliamentary history.

These amendments fiddle with DV definitions & contrive statutory considerations to effectively remove the presumption of innocence and protections from false allegations, that is, the fundamentals of Western jurisprudence. The justice system, the basis of civilised society, has been trashed supposedly to protect women.

In reality they are Emily's List pork for feminist votes (70% of unmarried/divorced women vote for the welfare protection and social justice [wealth redistribution] of the Big Sister party) and a disgraceful contrivance by the lawyers union to keep their multibillion dollar gravytrain alive and well. The LIBS (weak) shared parenting reform had reduced litigated divorce (profit) by 22%. In countries implementing a presumption of equal shared care it dropped 50%.

In short the Family Violence Bill increases divorce for female votes and re-election funding.

Further the National DV Plan proposes to implement the subjective & thereby infinitely elastic definition of DV of the Federal Family Law Act into all State legislatures.

The definition of family violence demonstrates an Orwellian willingness to redefine meanings and that cheapens the suffering of real victims.

The expansion of the Federal definition of family violence to include non-violence and the removal of the requirement that fear must be reasonable allows virtually any subjectively negative state of mind – as simple as I'm fearful - offered in evidence by a mother against a father as sufficient reason to deny children meaningful relationships with the father.

In short, family violence can be virtually anything. Under lawyer-feminist pressure, legislators are redefining abuse into meaninglessness, which gives lawyers,law enforcement, child protection the leeway to prosecute virtually anyone for anything they choose to construe as a crime.

This creates a vast $100M/yr National DV Plan bureaucracy as a full-employment entity for feminist lawyers and social workers and is a boondoggle for feminist organizations. It indoctrinates judges, prosecutors, law makers, teachers, and school children in an anti-male, anti-family ideology and channels billions of taxpayer dollars to Left voters. All that, without protecting abuse victims.

The divorce-DV industry now costs taxpayers an estimated $12B/yr in massive single parent welfare, the mass criminalisation/incarceration/impoverishment of men and dealing with the Pandora's box of personal & social pathologies directly associated with 40% of children being fatherless