TPP,

'Based on the way I phrase my posts you say I am a feminist.

I think if you read my response carefully you'll see I did actually go beyond your phrasing.

'Interesting but more a comment on yourself and how you choose to view the world'

Interesting indeed. I took your post and pointed out why I felt you more than qualified as a feminist. I did this by taking your worldview and matching it to that of a feminist. That is called justifying an agrument.

'I just asked hubby if I am. His reply “from my limited understanding of the feminist movement I wouldn’t say so”

Kudos to your husband. He is a very sensible man.

'I would urge parents to listen to their children though; if this is feminist thinking then it is one they got spot on.'

The problem with making an appeal to our feelings is that it makes us feel warm and fuzzy inside and all good about ourselves but does little else. Children are immature humans, and as immature humans they are very prone to manipulation. Heaven help me if I suggest that mothers going through a divorce might manipulate their children. I would never do that. But at least you admitted to thinking like a feminist (sort of).

'A small child terrified of males (the S means more than one) is a bit of aclue in a non-speaking child.'

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. You seem to be suggesting the child had good grounds for concern. Are you saying the child should be afraid of all men? Are you saying the child was acting rationally?

I have to say appealing to our emotions over our intellect is a common feminist strategy. As any good marketer will tell you, this is far more effective than getting people to think. When you throw in some misinformation like 1 in 4 women experiences domestic violence etc, you have a very potent mix. We're not thinking, we're feeling. We accept the bogus claims as fact: all men are a danger to children.

TPP:"There’d be policies about people with clipboards or briefcases attending meetings"

Nope. They've even run away from meetings that they called when I showed up and put my tape recorder on the desk.

Me:"I'm recording this to save taking notes, please state your name for the record"

CSA person:"erm...." [looks at other CSA person}"erm...."

Me:[turn tape recorder on]"My name is [...] and this is a recording of a meeting between myself and Mr? [indicates to CSA person to state her name]

CSA person:"We can't allow you to record this"

Me:"I'm sorry?"

CSA person:"It's CSA policy that we don't allow recordings"

Me:"but I recorded my last two meetings, with Ms Kylie Warren and with Mr Michael Peterson and Mr Jayson Lavender. It's just as well I did, because Ms Warren made a mistake and issued an order to garnish my wages when she had clearly said she wouldn't do so until my objection to the change of assessment determination had been finalised. If I hadn't had the tape, her mistake might have never been detected and corrected."

CSA Person:"I must insist you turn that off"

Me:"I'm not prepared to do so, given the history of dishonesty shown by some of your colleagues. I remind you that the reason I will no longer deal with your Agency on the telephone is because I have no confidence that your staff will accurately record what I or they say."

CSA Person:[to other CSA person]:"I think we'd better call this off"

Me:"What are you afraid of? Aren't you prepared to stand by what you say in this meeting?"

CSA person[gets up, gestures to other CSA person to follow and walks out].

That was the last time the CSA asked me to attend a meeting. I have offered to meet with several State Managers, including the current one, Lorna Andrews, to discuss the whole mess - none have accepted my offer. After my offer to Miss Andrews, which I never received a reply to, my case was transferred out of Qld and I now deal with the NSW office. The CSA is corrupt to the top.

My last got away from the topic, which is that affirmative action to place any specific group into leadership positions is dumb. Leaders are leaders because they lead, not because they're the right gender or the right colour. If they don't become leaders as a consequence of their own natural talents, they shouldn't be asked to try to pretend: it's not just unfair on us, it's unfair on them

I have little confidence that many of the women who might be selected as a result of an affirmative action process would even be the best woman for the job, let alone the best person.

The whole scheme is yet another way for second-rate ideologues to leverage their way into highly-paid positions. Look at Anna Bligh for the classic example of a gravy-train rider who's floated to a position way beyond her capacity. Now imagine a thousand Anna Blighs ruining businesses in the same way she's ruining Qld. We can't afford to pay for their free ride.

Me:”'Based on the way I phrase my posts you say I am a feminist. “
Dane:”I think if you read my response carefully you'll see I did actually go beyond your phrasing.”

I don’t remember sitting down, having a coffee with you so you could understand my view of the world, of men and of women – what tone I have or where I am at in life. I am pretty sure I didn’t say one in four women experience domestic violence.

I can’t appeal to your feelings? You left me no choice, your logic is flawed. The men seem angry at the CSA and at court and that the system is flawed. What I don’t understand is why females in general are to blame for this. When my daughter turns 18 is she suddenly going to be labeled a femnazi because Aussie males see females through this narrow lense?

It is a funny thing this ignoring children you advise. At what age would you suggest a child is finally listened to?

The children I get are mostly from households where domestic violence is common. And the child’s view is the one I need to address and cope with. I don’t meet either parent or the boyfriends. I don’t get the he said/she said, I get the child. No one is here to manipulate them. This is what I was saying to Anti, instead of stats and numbers that can be manipulated to suit any agenda, bring it back down to what we know personally.

But I might not have been clear, the children live with me full time from a few weeks to a couple of years.

Hubby’s last words to me on this subject were that I should go find out what feminism is since I am the only one that would be able to decide if I am one.

PS... a child who has been attacked by a dog will end up scared of all dogs for awhile. No it isn’t rational, but it is a common reaction.

Anti that recorded stuff was brilliant.

Accounts like Anti's are why I suggested a Child's Advocate. If court-appointed, the CSA could not fail to acknowledge that the children are stakeholders, and that the child's interests must also be addressed before enforcing crazed determinations.

Sadly, accounts like Anti's indicate why it probably still wouldn't work.

Rusty

Nothing that I have heard on this issue gives me any reason to believe that these children's advocates would be at all impartial.