Robert, thanks for taking the time out to explain where you're coming from.

Antiseptic and U Suss,
My remarks were clearly and directly aimed at Robert - did you somehow miss that? I was/am interested in his opinions because

a) we go back a long way on OLO
b)he does not use personal vilification as a debating tool when he runs out of argument
c) he appears to weigh and consider information that comes his way
d)he actually reads the contents of all the posts on threads. Oh and
e) We respect each others viewpoints even when we disagree.

Antiseptic admits he has anger management problems, advocates agression (yes. If you force me to I CAN bore myself senseless by rummaging through his history to find the places he has done this)and loses control in debates... while U Suss admits he often says things just to get a reaction, likes to stir things up (can give chapter and verse on that too)and then sulks and threatens to leave when people respond.

Why on earth would I be interested in directing queries or comment at either of you? Let alone indulging in your games.

SJF - I've been living in China for the past 3 years so I don't know if there are currently radical feminist groups or not in Oz. I had just assummed they exist because of the frequency with which we are told "Feminists say...", "Women think...", "Feminnazi's demand..." followed by the most outrageous and contentious garbage which neither I nor any other women here have ever heard uttered.

Just assummed therefore that the country was riddled with festering covens of rabid women giving public utterance in large groups to these sentiments.

Quite incredible. Here is an article about fatherhood and a number of men take this opportunity to once again vilify women, whether mothers or not.

In my grandmothers generation, fathers were not at all involved with any women's work, like taking care of the children. In my mother's generation, fathers were mostly very little involved in any parenting. In my generation that started to change, but was still very much up to the individual man.

What I see is, that in my children's generation there is a lot of participation by fathers.

The conspiracy theorists opinions about father participation has nothing to do with men-hating women undermining fathers. Fathers are participating in their children's lives more than ever in history, because of changing expectations.

Could feminism be congratulated for challenging all society's established roles for men and women and therefore freeing men to become actively participating parents without ridicule?

I for one think so. It wasn't so long ago that it was seen as rather suspect when a man wanted to engage in any kind of nurturing or caring role or career voluntarily

Romany, you are most welcome. I hope that I've explained it clearly enough.

I have to admit in the case of a couple of fundies I make an exception of "he does not use personal vilification as a debating tool when he runs out of argument" and occasioanlly I cross the line with others although I hope thats more when I reach the point of recognising that the arguments are pointless.

Usual Suspect I'm a bit distressed to find that I'm probably a radical feminist ;) I tend to think a significant factor in maternal bias is patriachal more so than fenminism and have said so on a number of occasions - outed myself apparently.

SJF, I'm not trying to twist your arguments but the "female paradise" part seems to suggest that you are trying to negate the idea that prime (or exclusive) care is something often sought by women and that it's not always about the childs best interests. There is no suggestion that prime care is a paradise but it is something that is sought by some with great intensity and thrust upon others.

R0bert

Romany:"Antiseptic admits he has anger management problems, advocates agression (yes. If you force me to I CAN bore myself senseless by rummaging through his history to find the places he has done this"

No to both. Now, I'm calling your bluff - go and find where I have "advocated aggression". When you can't, come back and admit you're a lightweight liar. While you're at it, perhaps you can tell us which "radical" women's groups you "distance yourself from" and which men's groups are "nazi" as you claimed. It's interesting that you can take the time to have a swipe yet you can't provide the answers to 2 simple questions about a statement you made.

In fact, I have not initiated any form of aggresssive action either here or in the fight to prevent my ex's lies being used to "justify" my children being kept from me. I certainly do not advoctate standing idly by while people take their best shot at me, however. It seems you would like to class that as "anger management" problems, since you obviously prefer the sneaking attack from behind to the honest face-to-face discussion.

I find it fascinating that so many women are obviously so threatened by the thought that fathers may be valued as fathers, not just as cash-cows. I guess when you've regarded the children as your own special meal-ticket for so long, it must be hard to have to stand on your own two feet.

Antiseptic: "I find it fascinating that so many women are obviously so threatened by the thought that fathers may be valued as fathers, not just as cash-cows."

Who are these women? I'd like to know so I can avoid them, they sound like parasites to me. Please provide details about these scheming hussies, so that I may point them out to others as examples of people who manipulate systems to suit themselves. Antiseptic is not at all aggressive, nor does he treat women as a single homogeneous group, knowing that women are as every bit as individual as men.

It is such a relief to know from reading these pages that all men are fantastic fathers and have never manipulated their partners or the Family Law system.

What was the topic about.... fatherhood. Love seeing dads with their kids; at the supermarket, at concerts, really getting involved in their children's lives. I wasn't so lucky, my father went to work, drank with his mates, stumbled home after my bed-time. So I missed out on all the wonderful fathering that is happening these days. When I was a kid a man's man was considered to be one who avoided their wives and children as much as possible.

Now, I am acutely aware of the increase in parenting by many fathers these days. What a shame that both men and women are not more supported by our nation in raising the next generation by family friendly workplaces, parental leave, affordable schooling - all the necessities for human well-being.

Instead all we ever hear about is how bad one gender is compared to the other.

Men get short shrift on custody arrangements and any woman who dares to stick her head up and say that she believes in equal rights, because she wants her daughters to have the same opportunities as her sons, is immediately tarnished as an 'uber-feminist', I guess we have eradicated the 'femi-nazi', thank goodness. So I will keep an eye for those uber-fems, they sound really scary. How I do I recognise them, do they carry Uzis?

Fractelle, you're not one of the women I was referring to, although you do tend to become a bit hysterical in defending "the sisterhood".

An example: "It is such a relief to know from reading these pages that all men are fantastic fathers and have never manipulated their partners or the Family Law system."

No one except the odd nutter makes such a claim. The feminist side of this discussion, however, is quite happy to make the claim that "all men are bastards" while using the most extreme examples to tar the rest. It's not much fun being lumped in with extremists, is it, Fractelle?

Fractelle:"any woman who dares to stick her head up and say that she believes in equal rights, because she wants her daughters to have the same opportunities as her sons, is immediately tarnished as an 'uber-feminist'"

Not by me. I have both a daughter and a son and whilst I'm satisfied that my daughter has a rosy future doing whatever she may want to do, I don't see the same for my son if the "uber-feminists" who want to run things get their way. I thought that Warwick Marsh's article offered some hope that this may be self-correcting, but the response of otherwise sensible women to it, including your own effort, makes it clear that men have a long, hard way to go in the feminised world we are creating. As long as women like you choose to identify with the power-hungry, those people will endeavour to further polarise the discussion for their own ends. After all it makes for easy rhetoric, doesn't it?