Robert, SJF and Fractelle, great posts.

Posts by HRS and Jason show how far we as a society as a whole, both men and women, fathers and mothers, still have to go.

What makes a father Jason? Some matching DNA? Boys and girls need to prove first with their DNA that they are entitled to a male parenting role model? Luckily my husband didn't think so with my eldest son.

I liked the article, but found Marsh's comments conflating the ills of patriarchy, feminism and children weird. Surely he wouldn't want either his sons or his daughters growing up in a patriachal society? Feminism did much to dismantle patriarchy which restricts both women AND men. Just like a matriachal society would.

A campaign to highlight the importance of fathers in children's lives can only be good for children and men.

This was a thread ostensibly concerning positive fathering which posited fathers as caring and responsible: - mature people whose concern for children’s well-being supplanted the personal. Remarks like:

“I say any man is a fool to believe a women who says she is faithful to him alone...its nature of women to explore/exploit their sexuality...and its nature of women to hide behind pre-conceived images for best survival in any situation...combine these two...and you get...yep..” and

“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.”

certainly seem to prove we are pushing a boulder up a hill.

Do you truly consider that insulting, hurting and demeaning every single woman who posts on or reads this thread, along with our mothers, sisters and daughters; as well as the wives, mothers, sisters and daughters of every male poster, you’ll get people to agree with you?

Think we’re all gonna jump up and say “By god, you’re right. Women are the scum of the earth. I think I’ll go out and bash granny – the old slut deserves it?” or “Hey those two are a couple of sterling blokes. My mum must be an old whore!” You consider me, just because I am a woman, to be a slut and a whore? I find your gender immaterial -its your minds I consider contemptible.

Robert – "Demonised"? Farrell stands on public record as saying that incest is a positive thing from which “boys don’t seem to suffer – even from the negative experiences” and “incest is part of the family's open, sensual style of life, wherein sex is an outgrowth of warmth and affection”

His advice to absent dads to make a mouse pad from a photo not as a souvenir but “That way he or she will be running their hands and eyes over it every day.” I find flesh-creeping.

I remain flummoxed as to why he is not only allowed to influence real fathers, but is defended by them. And you.

Anansi Surely a father is entitled to know wether he is biological or not . He must be given the chance to accept or decline. Wat you say is absolutely unforgivable; i don't know how you could live with yourself, being unsure of your eldests biological makeup.

Don't jump to stupid conclusions Olly. My eldest knows exactly who his biological father is, my first husband. His biological father was not into being a parent. That was my job as far as he was concerned. He had other more important things to do.

Like you he thinks biological fathers can 'accept or decline' being a father. Funny that.

It took a monumental amount of effort on my part to make sure he was at least part at some school events. Even those he generally managed to keep to a minimum.

Contributing some DNA matter does NOT make a father. It is only interesting from a genetics point of view.

My son is fortunate in that he has a father figure who is very proud of him, of all that he has achieved and his dreams for his future. He is a wonderful young man.

On another note, I'm going to have to do some research on Farrell. He sounds like a creep.

Robert - oh whoops. I really do apologise. I realise now you did not accuse Liz of demonising but of "discrediting" Farrell. Sorry.

Olly, I have never met "Anansi" in person but it never occurred to me for an instant to put the interpretation on her words that you immediately jumped to. Nasty stuff.

And I agree fully with her about DNA not making a father. My husband was also one who declined to be a father; but he also refused to divorce me. So unfortunately though my kids had their father living in the same house until we finally managed to get away, they also grew up without a Dad. He condemned us to a life of poverty and fear and cut them out of his will when he was dying simply to get back at me. Yet he continued to assert what a wonderful father he was to all and sundry. He just never mentioned how many times he had done the "I brought them into the world so I have the right to take them out of it" line on me when I failed to jump quick enough when he commanded me to.

So do I consequently consider all men are dead-beat dads and useless parents? Not at all. I just consider that HE was.

And as I have repeated time and again, neither my experiences nor those of any of the other sole parent mothers whom I got to know during those terrible times ever found the System privileged us in any way. If fact in each of our cases it was the father who prospered while we and the kids lived in poverty and squalor.

It's sexist nonsense to assert the system works solely for women. It's a stuff-up from start to finish for people of BOTH genders and desperately needs to be dismantled and started all over again. But this time with input from those it is supposed to be helping. (Do I really need to clarify that I mean not only people of BOTH genders, but the children as well?)

Romany, I get somewhat frustrated that comments which there is some dispute about by Farrell are used to discredit everything else he has said (much of which is very valid).

I've done some research into the stuff Farrell is attacked over and I get the impression that he was trying to put some of the hysteria into perspective. That he was providing a counterpoint to the extreme other side of that debate and didn't consider how his comments could be misused. I could be wrong but even so that does not negate the value of the bulk of what Farrell has say.

I suspect that those who want to portray men as the recipients of the benefits of an enormous gender power imbalance focus on that stuff and overplay it to avoid looking at what Farrell actually has to say about "male power".

I think we have a lot better chance of getting to a better world when people stop trying to see the world as a conspiracy by the other side. HRS's feminist being to blame for everything is as bad but no worse than the idea that men have set the world up to suit themselves.

R0bert