Whatever happened to the private member's Bill in NSW to remove the word 'father' from birth certificates? Mother would become 'birth mother' and instead of father there would be 'Parents Present', the rationalisation being that it is who is in the relationship at the time that matters, not the biological parentage and the rights of lesbian IVF couples should count. This would be a departure from the traditional purpose of a birth certificate.

In fairness, if we are to forget biological origin, why have 'birth mother' when the generic 'Parents Present' could represent all with an 'ownership' interest.

It is surprising that last heard the Coalition was going for a conscience vote.

I cannot say I am in favour of the change.

R0bert

'Liz seems to have made an industry of trying to discredit [Warren Farrell] without addressing the valid points he makes.'

The issue that Liz addresses is an important one, because it indicates a great deal about where WF is coming from. His earlier published views on 'positive incest', I believe, underlie much of his later writings.

In WF’s universe, women are not unequal to men – they have simply manipulated society to make men their slaves and, in return, given men an illusion of power. This is very similar to the power relationship inherent in incest – i.e. the empowered party projecting a fake dominance on the disempowered party.

If he inspires you personally, then good luck. However, when it comes to gender politics gurus, I’d advise anyone to give him a wide berth. There is a lot of weird dark matter embedded in that thar psyche.

Also re Michael Flood ... I think he is wise to alert men to the fact that many father's rights support networks are really fronts for an adversarial New Right political agenda. If a man joins a FR group that appears more interested in gender warfare rather than gender equity, it would be a good idea for him to look elsewhere.

And how many times do you have to keep pushing your hobby horse about the Family Law system being gender-biased against men? I think that a social system that still expects women to continue as primary carers of children post-divorce – a situation that curtails a woman’s earning power, renders her partly cap-in-hand dependent on a usually hostile ex-spouse and fuels every misogynist belief that women are out to deprive men of their kids – is not exactly a female paradise.

Perhaps the supposed scarcity of divorce information available to men is more a reflection of their advantage, not their disadvantage.

Just adding to my post, I now believe this was covered poorly by the media and in fact the change will equalise some rights for children in these circumstances. Apparently too the proposal is now to have 'father' as optional, which changes things somewhat.

SJF: "I think that a social system that still expects women to continue as primary carers of children post-divorce – a situation that curtails a woman’s earning power, renders her partly cap-in-hand dependent on a usually hostile ex-spouse and fuels every misogynist belief that women are out to deprive men of their kids – is not exactly a female paradise."

Well said SJF

Anyone who thinks that women enjoy the rollercoaster of the adverserial system of family law really need a reality check.

Fact is, family law is not working to anyone's advantage, least of all the children. All it manages to achieve is the opportunity for disgruntled spouses of either sex to wage a campaign of revenge. Whoever indulges in this behaviour (male or female) has no right to call themselves a loving caring parent.

One of the goals of feminism was and still remains that fathers be engaged and involved with the care of their children. Shared responsibility. Not gender wars.

Lobby those at the top who maintain the system in its present state where it is open to exploitation by any who have a chip on their shoulder.

Pelican
If mothers are allowing mother’s day to be banned from schools then they are making a big mistake also. Children are being systematically removed from parents and raised by the state. There will be no variety in the population, and most people will become
little automatons who are owned and dictated to by the state.

It is a completely Marzist/feminist system, and a part of that system was to take the father from the children. This breaks the family unit, and the children are now more easily owned by the state.

It is all dressed up as “the best interests of the children”.

Everybody is aware of who their mother is, but the same cant be said for your father. 40% of children are born with the wrong fathers name on their birth certificate. Only DNA can tell, cos sure as hell ya missus wont.