“So what does it mean to be a man?”

If you need to ask the question it means you probably are not one.

Far more important is accepting that whilst men and women are different, they are all individuals with equal rights, regardless of gender.

Last year there was some debate about changing the law to make joint custody etc the presumption.

Bondi Pete, you might have “talk men’s matters” with your MP but when I emailed my federal member on the matter of changing the “child custody” and other “separation” norms she did not bother to reply – but that was nothing less than I expected from Julia Gillard.

Colin Rouge , Its good to see some real comment based on real abuse by a system and individuals , I was asked today "why arent judges doing whats right ?" I see this as simple we currently have the weakest high court and judiciary since inception , the likes of Owen Dixon whilst often quoted are in fact mis quoted , Whilst Sir Dixon made simple and forthright description his true legacey Ill stood in courts and time after time heard his definitions mis quoted , Now that in its self is a problem , the entire practice of relying on anothers findings or work is somewhat Narcisistic as its a method of gaining credit from someone elses work and not your own skills , the simple truth is the current herd of swine with their collective snouts in the trough of the public purse are better at covering their butts and making findings to them in their view , whilst totally disregarding the evidence act , in summary they take a slant choose what is relavant in their eyes and misquote learned Folk the like of leo Cussins Owen Dixon and Anthony Graham with little insight into the way these men practically and faithfully discharged their knowledge and duties , Its a wonder with political favour will a truely learned and just judge ever be found again , one who carries the dignity of the system and its combatants equally and stands the test of public opinion not just legeslation of the contrived effect of the government of the day .

Timkins,

Daniel Donahoo said: “As a young father, men who deride my decision to be a dad, claim my marriage will end in divorce and label me naïve frustrate me. I am as naïve as the next man. The one thing I don’t wish to do is denounce their experience.”

Timkins says: “…You had an article in the press making many maligning unsubstantiated remarks about young men, and then lambasting them to get married… These were the type of statistics and facts that that were pointed out to you, and now you try and interpret this as being an attempt to undermine your marriage…”

No, Timkins. I’d say you’re the one misinterpreting DDs comments. May I remind you of what you said in the forum you’re referring to (Fatherhood and Fulfilment):

“There is no doubt in my mind that you have not looked at them, but if you have been married for say 6 yrs, you have on average 6 years to go. So during the next 6 yrs, you and your organisation can study and research what is going to happen to you, and then you could write an article on that, or talk about it on radio.” Posted by Timkins, Thursday, March 10, 2005 1:18:42 PM

I'm guessing that this attitude is what he’s referring to. Your phrase, “what is going to happen to you”, is suggestive of your conviction his marriage will end in divorce.

“Lambasting” is a very strong word. I don’t think many would share your view that DD is trying to castigate people into getting married.

Anyway Timkins, I believe people here are discussing Mark Christensen’s article, not your favourite vendetta.

I think its positive men are discussing "men's issues".

Maybe one area we could spend some time on is the whinging that goes on about how women are increasingly harping on our flaws and how the legal/political system abuses men's "rights". Notions that debating forums (eg universities) have been feminised or that men can't say what they want misses the point badly. Yes, the world is becoming less masculine, but this can hardly be the fault of anyone other than the individual men involved. Women (a family or anything else) are neither the solution or the problem. All this bitching is a distraction from having to do the hard work on the only thing we can really change – ourselves.

We are free to say what we want. The central issue is men fear the consequences of saying/doing what they really believe. The dilemma with the modern, integrated, transparent world is that trying to deny our inner malaise is becoming harder and harder to do. There is no way to hide it at work, on the footy field or down at the pub. Women and the systems we have constructed for ourselves are throwing it back in our face but when this happens we immediately blame them and thus miss the the fact it was us (not them) that have missed seeing the truth along the way (the movie Alexandra’s Project is an excellent representation of this dynamic).

My other comment relates to this obsession with the facts, proof or more research. This is another crutch. The issues are universal – it’s only the circumstances that change. The essence of the struggle is shared – that's why we engage in forums like this.

A man obsessed with proof should ask himself whether he can prove why it is important he prove something. Data is necessary, but insufficient. The truth is there to be seen regardless of the so-called objective information you gather around it.

Mark

Mark

excellent post, mate. Anyone can find some kind of factoid on the net to prove their point. That doesn't make for the give and take of good communication.

Having been thru the mill of divorce, I was confronted by my own shortcomings when my ex issued a restraining order. It is 5 years since then. I spend a lot of time with my kids now and my ex and I probably communicate better than when we were together. Takes a lot of strength to take a good hard look at yourself and I have a long to go yet.

Ambo, Mark, you might be missing the bit that there are a lot of guys who have not been the problem who are getting done over by the system. It appears to be set up to deal with worse case scenario's (people who need restraining orders etc) and based on some assumptions (it is the male who is controlling and violent).

That system then gets played by some where neither of the above apply to maximise benefits to themselves. We need more studies into DV which actually interview both men and women rather than the current bulk which only report DV against women to break the myth that men are more violent in the home than women. We need more honest reaserch in a bunch of areas to break the false assumptions behind the very real bias in the family law system (including the beliefs of mediators, councillors etc). Most of all we need polygraphs in the court room