Let's please calm the tetosterone down. What did I write that was damming to men in general.
1. I stated the laws of 40 years ago. Sorry but the local copper never interferred with domestics if it could be helped, he would take the woman to the neighbours till the man grew sober and that was that.
2. My mother was allowed to leave with a sewing machine to earn a living and nothing more.
3. I stated that the parenting principles that were shared by couples before marriage were important to keep after divorce.
So far no feminism, and hissy fitting? I will keep searching for that also. Considering the amount of men that took my view to the extreme view of prowoman and they have been proman, I believe that it is fair to state the case for either side but I clearly did state that I was in favour of both sides not just one. I was clearing up our present rights compared to 4o years ago and that we now have the ability to behave as equals. I will explain more clearly and precisely in future.
4. I did not state the womans wants and rights (I cant burn my bra, I need it too much can I burn a lipstick?)I was stating that if the family consisted of a stay at home mum correction parent, than why should the children be punished and it should change IF they are of young age, and/or have special needs after divorce.
5. I stated that if one parent did not contribute during the marriage on a stable and regular basis why should that change after divorce?
I also stated the complications of judging cases as a whole and not individually. I spoke of how each case is singular and did not demean or show any malice or hate towards men in the majority.

NOW COMES THE HISSY FIT TO PROVE EQUALITY....LOL
I am sure there are men out there who feel they have lost everything and have nothing at a very insure stage of life due to retirement funding and to fight for your children is also soul wrenching.
It can happen to women also. I lost everything which was mine independently from my investments. I am fighting to keep my rights as the main carer for the last 19 years and 3 years since divorce while daddy played being single. I get no maintenance from him and when the older kids university bills came in and the hospital bills for the 6 year old reached $6000just in the first quarter, yes I get urinated off to see him show up in brand new cars to pick the kids up and take them to his new property and then return to his career earning $300k while I am only trying to get half of years expenses based on receipts and help with medical and schooling. The new 19 y/o fiancee was bought a 2006V6FordUte. Our eldest19 year old works 6 days a week, studies veteriarian science and her boss is one of her professors. She is so proud of herself. She is too much like me and hated by fiancee so is not allowed to see Dad. So,,Yes It can get personal. I thought that the court had agreed to everything and I come home from work at 6 with tired children, to a letter saying no go he will not agree to anything. Woe is me? Doubt it. Life goes on and letting go is important and must be done to save yourself. He can see the children and I will raise them alone. To live with revenge and hate is so far removed from the person I am, but could have become it would have ruined me and my future. I am at peace, this is what I wish for men and women to get to in their life.If I cant succeed on my own then who's fault but my own.

alphafemale, that wasn't a hissy fit - rather paointing out the realities of your life. I was the one who mentioned hissy fits (or the lack of them) earlier in the thread.

I think what is telling is how unwilling some of these guys are to put constructive suggestions on how to fix things.

Our family law system is destructive, that most of us seem to agree on but some are so determined to prove it's all a feminist conspiracy that they won't contribute anything which might help.

Thanks for your efforts and communication.

R0bert

Alphafemale: You didnt simply say what the law was 40 years ago, you said 'Considering 40 years ago if your husband beat you and dragged you down the street by your hair, it was his right.'

That is why you were accused of throwing a hissy fit. It never ceases to amaze me the way people rewrite history in their own minds, even when the records of it are at hand, and then manage to convince themselves that this new history is the accurate one. In my experience this is a faculty in which generally women seem to have a superior skill level.

The patronizing 'keep the testosterone level down boys' type of comment shows your attitude to any man who dares challenge your outrageous assertions.

Of course women also suffer under Family Law arrangements - the issue is the prevalence of it. For example, women also die at work however if you are a man in Australia you are statistically 3560% more likely to die at work than is a woman. That makes it a much bigger issue for men than it is for women. The same is true of Family Court injustices.

Alphafemale.

"I get no maintenance from him "

Is that maintenance or child support you are talking about?

If it is maintenance then no you do not deserve it. Boy I wish I was earning 300k a year this puts him in the top 4% of taxpayers.

"I stated that if one parent did not contribute during the marriage on a stable and regular basis why should that change after divorce?"

It may or may not change after divorce, but if fathers who question their work life style and change it to have more time to spend with the kids then that should be allowed and encouraged. Much has been written about the 'absent father' and when dads change this sould be encouraged, regardless of the previous history. Even criminals are allowed to change their lives, so why cant fathers be allowed as well?

You wrote "to live with revenge and hate" you can stay in this position or choose to move away from it, it is your choice!

Moving away from it means accepting responsibility for your own behaviour and not blaming the world or him for what has happened

Claiming no receipt of maintenance as a merit badge is almost as bad as expecting to get it. Mentioning the ex's income in this context looks like latent entitlement attitude. Child support as a percentage of income is alimony by stealth, maintenace by another name.

Earnings have no bearing on the independent NEEDS and costs of raising a child. Has a lot to do with being fortunate and priviledged enuff to be born to a parent who can provide life's extras. These daze the massive middle class takes a lot of the extras for granted. A new car, 3 tvs, dvd players, latest kids fashions, 3 extra curricular activities a week, a playroom kitted out like a toy shop, private school and tertiary education are all extras in life that many folks expect as normal.

Kids dont really value much of the trappings, they want a real relationship with BOTH parents. There's usually a parent advancing the childs interests in this extra stuff... it brings in the bucks.
People get used to largesse. After a while the priviledge of receiving a gift gets rationalised as a recipient entitlement and gift-giver obligation. Sign of the times.

Best interest of the child has been very usefully distorted to push parental agenda for the sake of a buck. The idea that its in the best interests of a child to develop an entitlement, fleece-thy-parent attitude, is bizzarre. But it flies... very well.

A childs (financial) NEEDS arent 10 times higher because the parent earns 10 times more than the next person.

Thankfully we dont have imputed income determinations, driver and professional licence cancellations and prison terms for child support arrears in this country. Cant see a conservative govt letting that happen. Can see a labour govt going in that direction. In which case, a lot of mens shelters, er l mean prisons, will be going up.

Rant over, lm off to molify my raging androgens with a shot of estrogen. This HRT lve been on for several years is making my nipples tender tho and lm starting to develop a chest 'profile'. Damn.