Pynchme.
1. Since you are keen on analogies eg :- the ku klux klan reference. I suggest what you say is that its not surprising that hitler killed more people than pol pot because he had a larger population to work on. True perhaps but that doesn't make it right and it doesn't help the people who were killed.
2.Although there are undoubtably some men who are fathers who have walked away from their responsibilities, there are also many others who have been cruelly torn from their childrens lives for no other reason than vindictiveness from their former partner.No wonder that men are suiciding at the rate of 5-1 compared to women perhaps for the same reason that you state as regards child neglect.In 85% of cases the father doesn't get custody [ do the maths].Why isn't the government pouring millions of dollars to address this problem.
3.Yes sometimes they are and often it is the father who is left in poverty. When i got custody all i had was a broken child a pension and a mountain of debt as a result of my court battle while the ex [the abuser]got all the free legal aid. I often didn't have 2 bobs to rub together for years but my child was never neglected or left alone because of it, in fact she thrived.
4.I dont know your job but from what you say, it seems the type of job you work at would naturally bring you into contact with people with problems, 50-75% of your clients being sexually abused does not mean that 50-75% of PEOPLE are being abused, the vast majority of people would not be coming to you because they have no problems or been the subject of abuse. I have seen plenty of stories recently in the press of children DYING because of neglect, usually by the mother or BF how serious does it have to be.
5.No arguments there. I am more interested in the rights and well being of FATHERS and their children not so much the specific interests of men or otherwise.

Talk about "approval and apologetics for abusers"...

Pynchme:"1. Since women provide the vast majority of child care; it's not surprising that they also tally up a greater proportion of occasions of child neglect."

No, it's not, but what IS surprising is that all of the focus is on male perpetrators of sexual abuse, while the far greater amount of harm is being done by female so-called "carers".

Pynchme:"2. Where are the fathers ?"

Good point. The data all show unequivocally that the presence of the biological father is protective. If abuse occurs in an intact family, the father is just as culpable as the mother, although there is a disturbing trend for Courts to allow mothers of children who have been abused by the father to claim ignorance or fear of retaliation as excuses for permitting it. A father of a child who is neglected or abused by the mother or an asociate will be far more likely to be held accountable, even though he is not the perpetrator.

Pynchme: “3. Women raising children alone are often in dire financial straits; “
Families are often in dire financial straits, especially ones that don't qualify for all the handouts that single mothers get, like public housing. A few years ago my ex had a taxable income of $14,000, while her gross income was over $32,000, not including the cheap Housing Commission house which cost her less than a commercial flat would have. That meant her net was a tad over $29,000, which at the time was equivalent to a $40,000+ salary.

At the time, I was earning about $40,000 and so my net was about the same as hers, but I had to give her $8000 of that for "child-support" and then try to pay my rent ($9,000 at the time), my other bills and feed and clothe myself, as well as buy things the kids needed when they were with me on weekends. I went broke trying.

Don't talk to me about single mothers living in poverty, I'll spit in your face every time. Let 'em get a job if they want more money - I have to and my taxes are subsidising childcare for them.
Pynchme: “4.”
I've no idea what your role is - every time you bring it up it seems to be more grandiosely self-important and ever-more strongly demonstrative of the dysfunctionality of men...

If you wish to "speak from authority", then please enlighten us as to what that authority derives from. if you can't, you're merely windbagging.

Pynchme: ”5. You refer to women and their Bfs - very true. Noting, of course, that Bfs are blokes."

And, of course, that women are chicks... Gee I'm glad we cleared that up

Talk about "approval and apologetics for abusers"...

Yes and it is as it will always be.

The likes of pynchme sobbing over the poor women, always the victim, the men, well, it's their nature to be abusive misogynists.

And the likes of antiseptic, always a victim of the system, feminists, women etc.

A woman is single with a child;

pynchme is guaranteed to see a courageous survivor of an abusive male, struggling to make ends meet and always putting the children first

antiseptic is guaranteed to see a manipulative bitch who used the CSA to screw her ex and is using the kids to do so while neglecting them, with a poor father that has been shut out of his beloved kids lives

The thing that I don't 'get' is that while 'septic is always jumped on as being some woman hater when he sees things from the woe is me men angle, anyone who ever calls a woman on her similar bias is considered just a woman hating troll. How is it the women posters always have this god given and granted moral high ground?

Anyone with half a brain can spot you're as bad as each other.

eyeinthesky; Well spotted.

'The only time I have seen any reference to (often distorted) stats on child neglect, it's raised as a diversion from the overwhelming statistics of male agression[sic]. That is - as an apologetic for male aggression or abuse.'

That right there just proves pynchme sees all these threads as an us and them, male vs female war. That the quoting of any statistics that shows men aren't the sole purveyors of abuse (or in women terms; unfortunate neglect as a result of absent fathers and poverty), is really just a 'diversion'.

Any discussion of female abuse (whoops! I mean unfortunate neglect as a result of absent fathers and poverty) is a diversion from what we should be talking about, and what pynchme really wants to talk about, and what should stay being the only thing that's ever talked about, and that's men abusing women and children.

In fact the only reason anyone would ever bring it up is 'as an apologetic for male aggression or abuse.'

Oh the irony!

Antiseptic: 1. <"... while the far greater amount of harm is being done by female so-called "carers".>

Oh? Then how is it, as I pointed out, that one never comes across male or female clients who are traumatized by 'neglect'; but there is an endless stream of people (in one of my roles - mostly males) who recount the lifelong burden of coming to terms with being sexually abused as children or as teens.

2. As you point out, many families are in dire straits too - therefore why is neglect always laid at the door of the single female household as a form of abuse? Where did you say the men are again?

3. <"Don't talk to me about single mothers living in poverty, I'll spit in your face every time">.

I'm sure you'd love to spit in my face, just the way you think it's normal behaviour to close doors in a woman's face as she approaches.

4. I raise the issue of male clientele to point out their plight as well. Why are you never concerned about male victims of male abuse?

Nevermind: I have a little something for you - maybe give you a laugh:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i6ilCbQgLE

and Part 2:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctY76p3anC4&feature=related

Houellebecq: If a thread or article comes up that's about neglect I'll be glad to dive in and condemn anyone who causes children pain and suffering. Since I haven't seen such a thread (why don't you start one?) tell me why it's brought up?

Abuse of children continues because people (about 90% of whom are male) perpetrate and too many others refuse to recognize it or condemn that exploitative behaviour - therefore it continues because some men do it and too many other men and women allow it.

Btw: I think I agree with Antiseptic about women who are aware and allow such abuse to continue - I believe there must be more enquiry into that and that many should probably be charged for failure to protect.