Robert

A desire for 'equal treatment'. According to who? And the assumption here is that women are advantaged in law? It's a myth. There are no winners in divorce. And, the family law courts in no way advantage women.

Having visited her website, what appalled me is Sue Price providing a public forum for one-sided, myth-making, vitriol towards women who find themselves embroiled in family law matters, and the open invitation for anyone else who wants to misrepresent women to do so on her website. Of course, those women who 'support' their man are perceived as heroines, against the backdrop of the dastardly first wives.

Both women and men suffer in divorce. She is only there for men, based on her misrepresentation of 'victimisation'. Women suffer appallingly after a divorce. And are frequently subjected to bullying by not only the ex, but the new partner as well.

There is not much out there for women either Robert. It's a lonely, isolating life, finding yourself as a single mother. When men divorce, they do not have to live life with the same degree of social abandonment as women do. Men also repartner much more quickly than women.

It's also a myth that there is much more 'out there' for divorced women. The federal funding towards divorced mens organisations is significantly more than towards divorced womens organisation.

'She speaks out strongly against those who misuse the system ...' And who are those that supposedly 'misuse the system' ... Women? And how do they misuse the system? And whose perception is this? Sue Prices?

She is nothing more than a self-styled 'champion' towards a cause that demonises women who supposedly 'misuse the court'.

Liz wrote:

Both women and men suffer in divorce. She is only there for men, based on her misrepresentation of 'victimisation'. Women suffer appallingly after a divorce. And are frequently subjected to bullying by not only the ex, but the new partner as well.

--

however from:

http://www.wesleymission.org.au/publications/r&d/suicide.htm

"Recent research into male suicide in this age group revealed that males in the 'separation phase' of a marriage break-up were most at risk of suicide, compared with widowed or divorced males.76 Whilst these are only preliminary findings, they suggest that the severe disruption of separation and the high levels of interpersonal conflict that were associated with it, were perhaps the greatest contributing factor, along with separation from children.

Marriage breakdown is a significant characteristic of male suicide in the 24-39 age bracket. The anxiety and emotional pain of separation and divorce appear to effect men differently."

-

Of course, it is all men's own fault

and from today's press:

http://smh.com.au/news/national/more-wives-save-to-make-the-big-split/2006/04/19/1145344153531.html

"A survey has revealed that thousands more wives than husbands are putting away money in preparation for divorce."

Sort of says where women are investing their assets, doesn't it?

But it is all men's fault that women want to leave them, after all, they are smelly, dirty, selfish and horrible - the very creatures that women's mothers' warned them about. I don't know why women bother with men in the first place.

Hamlet

I once did a professional development seminar on suicide. What the spokesman said was that a relatively equal number of women and men wanted to commit suicide post separation. However, the women had the children to consider, which was decisively discouraging.

I don't think you can speak for women as to what is in their minds. Nor can you judge them for being the ones that ended the marriage and then provide trivialised reasons for supposedly ending marriages.

Get over this competing victim syndrome.

Both men AND women suffer post separation.

Liz, I'd be interested in hearing your views on the champions of the mothers groups. The type who consistantly demonise men whenever family law reform is suggested by spurious claims of protecting women and children implying that most men are violent offenders or remarkably more likely to harm their own kids than the mother (I'll leave the DV part alone here, evidence for that issue is harder to get a consistant view of).

Did you try the experiment I suggested and have a look at some government websites and review the disparity between the resources available for men and women?

I agree that the "Law" does not do much specific discrimination, rather it is implimented in a manner which creates significant discrimination. A mix of "common sense" guides which don't really reflect the significant changes that result from a relationship breakdown, to many biased people working in the support systems (RA, CSA etc), a lack of consequences for some kinds of wrongdoing etc.

Funding - thats the first time I've heard anybody suggest that mens support services get more money than womens. Or were you being more specific, groups dedicated specifically to divorced men or women which might exclude a lot of groups which work in the field but which go under another label?

I'm guessing that you and I will be unlikely to reach any kind of agreement on most of these issues but maybe we will help one another understand the other side of the issues a bit better. I do appreciate that we are able to have this discussion so far without personal insults - a pleasant change from some parts of the forums. Thanks for your part in that (seeker may not agree).

Cheers
R0bert

Hamlet

I admire many of your posts elsewhere on OLO. However, I am having a great deal of difficulty determining your meaning with your posts to this thread.

The only point I think you are making is that it is permissable to denigrate women, but not permissable to make even the slightest negative comment against men. When I have made criticism you seem to think a little tantrum is the appropriate response such as this pathetic little whinge: "So true, men are rotten and terrible"

As I know you can be very cogent in your posts why this terrible lapse on male/female topics?

I have been very fair and reasonable, I have acknowledged where some women abuse the system and why this imbalance exists.

I could appear as bitter and resentful as you - I have every reason to. I have had appalling treatment by men (abusive ex husband, rape, sexual harassment at work) yet I manage to not engage in the vitriol towards all men as you, Seeker and Maximus engage in against all women.

As with the Muslim debate I know that it is completely erroneous to blame everyone for the faults of a minority.

Again I ask analysis and possible solutions - I have proferred my ideas here, how about some effort from you?

To R0bert and Liz

I am really enjoying the exchange between you both. For myself, I have no more time for this thread.

Regards

Hamlet,

I’ll take your advice for the moment and keep my fire stick away from Scout for she’s likely to burn down the camp.

As you can see she is not so much scouting for good ideas, as she is for weakness. Has she ever really responded to any serious challenge? No, no further than required to generate an impression - she’d rather focus on criticising the presentation – especially when she feels threatened by the concept being presented.

She seems preoccupied with forming relationships on OLO, using girl-scout maturity level social strategies to bully by exclusion, expulsion and other classic girl-gang dynamics rules. Oh sure, she’s no slouch when it comes to pitting men against others either. All these tools reside in the genes of every girl-scout, but don’t be fooled into thinking they will ever want to keep it in their pants. In fact, such a proposition from you, was precisely the cause of her wrath.

This is also why Scout will not seriously comment on mandatory paternity testing (nor about keeping it in HER pants). This is also why she keeps threatening to leave, but never does.

R0bert,

I did refrain with Liz and waited for you instead. Not so long ago, on another thread, our Liz had this to say:

“Withdrawing welfare is such a concern to me.

How will we be able to afford the grog that fuels the alcoholic degradation of the nation?

I suppose though, with the decrease in our drunken stupors, we'll actually have some idea who the fathers of our children are.”

I guess that goes some way towards explaining her position on things (and no … Scout, please don’t bring up irony or satire)