SJF

So like an ostrich you stick your head in the sand, preferring that your bigotry against men - half of the total population - is never challenged. How obvious to act shocked and stalk off.

Here again is the link to research challenging your foolish belief that child sexual abuse (in particular) is restricted to males, or that it is mainly males who are involved. Although now it also appears that you think it is also restricted to Europeans. The research can set you right on that too.

Female-Perpetrated Child Sex Abuse: Definitional and Categorisational Analysis

http://www.atypon-link.com/AAP/doi/abs/10.1375/pplt.14.2.218 (click on PDF report)

I cannot imagine where you ever got your jaundiced view of men from. Didn't the footage of the hundreds of men fighting the Victorian bush fires and caring for victims say anything to you? If some men do atrocious things and some women do too, that doesn't mean that a particular gender is inherently flawed or to be more highly valued.

mog:"If you don't use violence or abuse then get on with working for its elimination and reduction and if you do, give it up."

And if you don't make false allegations of abuse to bolster your Family Law case, then get on with working for its elimination and if you do, give it up.

Isn't that easy?

I remind you that most violence against children is committed by mothers or by unrelated men associated with the mother, not by biological fathers or those associated with them. If you are serious about wanting to prevent violence against children, it is not sensible to attack biological fathers and ignore the far-greater number f cases perpetrated by mothers and their associates.

Cornflower

Like an ostrich with its head in the sand you are (deliberately?) blind to any achievements by women and assume that "MEN" do everything.

Take off your Blinkers and you might be taken more seriously by others.

""They are men and women from every walk of life and they are highly trained by professional firefighters," a CFA spokesman said."

http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/article/2009/02/10/51621_latest-news.html

Women contribute in all human endeavours.

Now the topic is:

The Children's Voices

Do you really care about children or are you just here to diss women?

As has been stated beautifully by others who ARE genuinely concerned about children's welfare; the Family Court needs a complete overhaul in its methods, its views and policies in order to put the requirements for children BEFORE warring parents of any gender.

SJF you keep referring to men as menz. This need you have to denigrate an entire sex is disturbing. This infantile inability to feel self-worth... Let me be the first to tell you that you are special. You are unique.. You matter. Now, unfortunately, you also appear to have a raging case of Penis Envy. It would seem your mental development has been retarded by an inability to progress from the phallic stage of your psychosexual maturation leaving you unable to put aside your sexual impulses towards your father that, when not reciprocated, have left you angry and bitter and caused you to employ the displacement defense mechanism of shifting the object of your undealt with emotions onto men in general.

You also appear to have a problem differentiating between fantasy and reality because, in reality, this article was about a mother stealing a child from his home and the proper legal consequences of her doing so under the Hague Convention and Australian law. The title may have been Children's Voice, but Children is a red herring. This article is about the authors, and your, apparent inability to differentiate between the best interests of a child and the desires of the mother. An inability to accept that mothers are not are not inherently the most capable parents and a simple infantile desire to get your way.

I suggest we set up a treatment regimen immediately. Please contact me at your earliest convenience.

Kind Regards,

Dr. David Corteguera

ENOUGH!

It's no wonder so many of you can't focus on the issue of children. You act like children yourselves.

Antiseptic, James, LBF, David, Cornflower, runner and you too SJF, (James's initial posts weren't unreasonable) - get over yourselves for just one damn second! This thread is a circus.

The family law system fails to serve either gender. We shouldn't be viewing it through a prism of gender or victimhood as much as a malfunctioning system.

So kiddies, I don't give a sh!t which gender are *victims*. Whinge elsewhere.

Sure, the author could have included some mention of children killed by mothers but it doesn't matter - the key phrase was in the last sentence of her article:

"The government also needs to urgently amend FCA procedures to allow children to give testimony and to implement an inquisitorial, rather than adversarial system of law in cases of alleged abuse."

BINGO!

I won't hijack this due to my preference for the inquisitorial system on the whole, but I'll point out that when deciding what's best for children, an adversarial system where two parties lawyer up and attack each other, is the dumbest concept imaginable.

It only exacerbates hatred between parties and encourages distorting truth, at cost to children who become a trophies.

The inquisitorial system is an investigative system where a judge (not always an ex-lawyer) is in charge and instead of merely acting as umpire, the judge requests evidence from lawyers, as well as independent third parties.
The case is reviewed and an outcome decided after consideration of all evidence, rather than what's decided appropriate for a jury after the courtroom circus, which all too often involves lawyers hammering away at witnesses and victims until they're in tears (an especially horrifying spectacle in rape cases).

So for this nugget, the author has my support - her suggestions would serve decent parents, not specifically men or women.

This system is used for criminal law Japan and Germany. More guilty verdicts, fewer cases of wrongful imprisonment.

Far better, albeit with less power and profit for the lawyer fraternity, so they resist change.

Fractelle,

'As has been stated beautifully by others who ARE genuinely concerned about children's welfare; the Family Court needs a complete overhaul in its methods, its views and policies in order to put the requirements for children BEFORE warring parents of any gender.'

Everyone here has blinkers on. The interests of the children will always neatly align with the interests of the mother due to the general attitudes of society towards the value of mothers and fathers; A mothers motives are always assumed to be pure, and best for the children, a father is always under suspicion of being a predator or violent. These debates further prove this. All the female posters roaring 'I am woman, I am handed 'putting the kids first' status on a platter, so off I go to question the motives of the self interested male posters'.

So we always have the same argument here.

1. Article about all the men who have harmed babies.
2. Male posters defensive as there are no examples of where women have done same.
3. Female posters saying it's all about children, not men.
4. Male posters saying well if it is, why don't you care about all abuse not just men's abuse.
5. Women posters say well more men are abusive, lets get back to the children. All you men are callous selfish child endangerers as you cant let it just be about the children.
6. Male posters say that's easy for you to say as the shift towards protecting children is inevitably a shift towards protecting mothers interests at the expense of fathers interests.

To be 100% sure of child safety, why don't we implement Phantos suggestion? If ever a man is accused of abuse, just lock him up and deny any contact with the children. We cant afford any mistakes can we?