And by the way: If feminists are presumably supportive of women, do they need to be hostile to, or suspicious of men? Some of the guys who go to men's sheds and men's groups seem to have the full support of wives and partners. It would be nice if each group could support the other.

That's a good comment, Waverley.

The problem is that the way the gender topic has been thought about is as a "zero sum game", which means that in order for women to "win", there must be men who "lose". This appeals to a politics of resentment, in which the emphasis is on casting blame rather than on solving problems. There must be "fights" and "champions of the underdog" standing on the side of grace and good against the forces of oppressive evil.

Of course, this is obviously stupid, but it's an easy story to sell if one is unscrupulous. There are lots of people who've had bad experiences and some of those will feel that the deck has been stacked against them, so if some snake-oil salesperson comes along with a panacaea they are easy pickings. Even more, they are easily taught not to trust anyone who tries to tell them different: it's simple aversion-based behavioural modification. Even bacteria will learn to avoid sections of a Petri dish that contains some substance that causes them to "feel bad", even if it contains more of things that they need to prosper as a colony.

There is a lot more going on than this, of course. I'd be happy to continue the discussion if you're interested.

Hmm. It's easier to say what we don't want- than what we do.
eg
I find some women's activists are too full of some kind of bitterness, perhaps coming from bad experiences with men. And I shut down or turn off when I see their name.
Likewise- few of us would find attractive the kind of guy who gropes people. I don't like being groped or grabbed. Why should women (or anyone really) like the kind of guy who just grabs people? Trump's behaviour is appalling. My friends say there's very little of the language or behaviour that Trump more or less boasts of, even in gym change rooms.

Put those extremes aside, and many of us have great people in our lives: kids, women, men, children, who listen to us -and who hopefully we listen to!

What's her name.. the writer of the 'Female Eunuch' has a lot to answer for. Reading it at age 14 I thought: if that's the way wimmin want to go - then on yer bike ladies (or ladettes). 40 odd years later and having been a sole parent Dad for the best part of half that time I can see why some women are like they are. I can, after being on the rough end of the pineapple AKA Child Support Agency, see why many blokes don't want anything to do with the person they once loved, similarly with the ladies.Go to the outskirts of Humpty Doo, Bees Creek, Mandorah and talk to the "blockies" of the Darwin region, there are many tales of men being screwed by CSA/Family Court.

There are feminists, there is feminism and then there are feminazis. None of which have anything to do with being "feminine". During that 40 years since reading Mizz Greers opus, that and many other feminist writers literature. For the 20 plus years I have been a single Dad raising 2 sons I can see why some women are as they are portrayed by media - likewise as the recipient of female inflicted psychological, financial and emotional abuse, I have seen the other side of the coin. There are bastards who don't pay their Child Support, but for those non payers with vagina's, it is another matter all together in my experience. When it comes to parental responsibilities, put on a bucket of tears before the magistrate/registrar then get a pat on the wrist, a hot cup of tea and the court attendant will come over with a box of Kleenex because the poor bastard father is still being seen as the perpetrator irrespective of the actual circumstances involved.

I chuckle though, witnessing the tired old hags of bra burning campaigns past who are now grandparents and having to put up with absent daughters and daughters in law abrogating their parental duties...how many chooks have come home to roost when their words condemn Mizz Greer and her proteges throughout the years.

I have a lot of time for Germaine, Albie. She was and remains fundamentally well motivated and has had the guts and honesty to change her view as new evidence has come in. The same goes for Eva Cox.

I don't think there's any point in name calling.

The problems have largely been caused by institutionalising policies based on very simplistic models of human behaviour in order to make management easier and to satisfy a political need to be seen to be "doing something". If anyone should be castigated over that it is Bob Hawke and the "femocrats" (as Anne Summers, the original femocrat, coined it) who were too politically lazy and personally venal to do the heavy lifting of properly analysing the situation, opting instead for a stupidly shallow populist approach.

The tax department dropped the hot potato of collecting child support as soon as it could, realising it was counter-productive, and so the CSA was born, as deformed a monster child as has ever been seen in this country.

On a more positive note, it's now gone the way of the dodo after years of mismanagement and destruction and the job has been given to the DHS, which seems to be doing much better.

Nice thoughts, Craig. I wish all the gender warriors were as kind as you are. Sadly.......