I would agree with that Andyman,

This article lecture young males to get married, but the way the Family Law system currently is, lecturing young males to get married is like lecturing young men to go over the wall and face machine gun fire. Some may believe that they won’t be hit, and some won’t, but statistically the vast majority will, and there is minimal to help them afterwards.

There are becoming fewer women in time that would be eligible for marriage. Feminists must be avoided at all costs. I have read much feminist literature, and rarely will the word “love” be included in that literature. It does not seem to be in a feminist’s dictionary, and it is more than likely that during a marriage to a feminist, she will be constantly trying to destroy her husband as much as possible while keeping him alive so that more punishment can be inflicted. They don’t believe in love, and most don’t like children either, so having children won’t make them any happier

If the woman has spent most of her life addicted to women’s media (and there is an enormous amount of it), then it is highly likely that she will not be able to make the transition from a world where everything has to be “fun”, “games”, “quizzes” and “gossip” to a marriage environment. Unfortunately this type of media is now extending down to girls of primary school age, and I have seen no attempts by women’s organisation to limit that media. Any attempts by males to limit it is normally regarded as “misogynistic”, or not giving women “voice” etc.

All I have to say Daniel is you have a very naieve and simple way of thinking, life, relationships and every other thing that we undertake is a little more complex than you just state have a good day and I hope your relationship goes well and is indeed simple look a bit further than your back yard.

Andyaman very insightful, speciall that GEM of a statement "Fathers roughouse with boys, teaching them when enuf is enuf".. ! excellent.
Just one of many of the valuable lessons which are part of our rapidly decaying culture, and another one of those things which was 'not anticipated' by the actions listed by you above it, e.g. the no fault divorce etc. I keep harking back to anthropology, and how various case studies can show us the DANGERs of tinkering with important aspects of our culture. The consequences are seldom realized nor seen for a generation. Have a look at "Steel Axes for Stone age Australians" for how loss of male self image caused the complete social and cultural and physical destruction of a whole tribe in Cape York. Simple through the introduction of a steel axe by well meaning whites to the aboriginal group in question.

Another valuable point was the lack of mention of LOVE in feminist literature. How critical and crucial is THIS. But wait, there's more!
We do need to recapture love, romance, care, committment, but the one thing in my opinion we need even more than this is the 'spiritual framework' which becomes the glue and the modus operandi of all of that. Billy Graham (evangelist) packed the MCG with over 130,000 people in 1959, no bigger crowd even for a grand final has ever been seen there. With all the meetings held, a quarter of the Australian population attended. That says something about the prevailing heritage of the day.
This weekend, his son Franklin is going to be at Telstra Dome, for Festival Victoria. (18th,19,20th) Its free, why not all come along and see something of that framework which will hold us all together in the storms of life.

BOAZDavid,

If we argue natural laws, we can ask, "We've had fathers in families for millenia. Why the indefensible (from a natural POV) view that mums can pick up all the slack?" Or, just ask any single mum how busy she is with the kids...

From a sociological viewpoint, we can ask, "Why do so many children seek out fathers, even sperm donors? Why do fatherless kids commit more crime and suicide more?" (Stats from every recent applicable government study.)

If we ask, "What do people want?" there's the growing desire for 50/50 care after divorce (80% or more), the desire of children for paternal identity, the regret of separated people who have said (30% in one study) "We could have worked things out with more time." What a poke in the eye for faultless divorce!

Healthwise, what about the child's right to access to genetically similar materials or to medical history that will facilitate treatment of a genetic disease? Or the 4,100 CSA clients who died last year?

Whichever way we want to look at it, people are craving stability but consume a steady diet of "why I should be unhappy". Children want male heritage and fatherly support. We all want to be healthy. And kids are better off with both parents in the home.

Those who would deny the importance of fathers, and the necessity of shoring up marriages, might consider the following before replying:

"If the Law is against you, argue the facts; if the facts are against you, argue the Law; if both are against you, call the other lawyer names."

That is, before they take the wearisome old Feminist tactic of calling me names or making unconfirmed statements. That would just make them look silly.

My ex's stated belief... "I suppose someone will have to teach them to shave."

It is this dismissive, derogatory abuse of the value of fatherhood which is damaging boys (and girls) daily.

Some marriages; because of physical or genuine emotional abuse, neglect, unfaithfulness or joint consent; should end. Most should not. 50% divorce rate? Insane!

family law practice is fraught with highly emotional clients. even more so than my old criminal law clients.

our culture chose to head down an individualistic path decades ago. the number of people who have difficulty accepting personal responsibility for the way they deal with things that go wrong in their lives has staggered me. the culture of blame is self-destructive.

relationship breakdowns are one of the biggest sources of violence in our society: perhaps the biggest. (i don't have comparative figures in front of me).

with an increasing trend towards relying on 'the law' to resolve our problems rather than more personal mechanisms, a system that is not supposed to resolve emotional issues is being held accountable for the emotional resolution of problems.

the law is not a counselling service. it is a human institution that arose out of a need to regulate transactions between people - particularly property. it can never be perfect. someone always loses. there are only so many options. none will ever fit every problem. that is why we still have common law. the more precisely we try to define human relationships, the more complex and convoluted - and broken - the outcome.

in short: everyone is responsible for *their* part in the processes of relationship breakdown. anything left to someoneelse to resolve will always dissatisfy. the third party is not the one *feeling* the pain directly.

no one is perfect: be they mother, father, judge, lawyers, whatever. and no single thing/approach will/can solve all problems.

Daniel,
Good to hear young men speaking their truth.
I agree and we are setting up a number of pilot programmes to

1. mentor expectant dads with dads 12 month further down the track
2. Skil up new dads
3. create fatherhood festivals in communities around Australia
wher the role of fathers is celebrrated, questioned and stories shared
see our website www.fatherhoodfestival.com and www.fatherhood.com.au
4. researching creating high school programs for boys on subject like

consensual parenting and why father?
5. create awarneness raising products like the Fatherhood CD (with John Butler, Xavie Rudd etc..)
so all in all it comes down to vision, commitment, time and money.

We have the commitment and vision.

we have set up a charity to work on the other 2 aspects
feel free to contact me on this issue

at info@fatherhood.com.au
highest regards
Colin George