Mumsnet Vs Fathers4Justice

I wasn't sure if it was plural or singular. Data is, anecdotes are. Anecdata is a made up word in which anecdotes are submitted as evidence ie data to prove or disprove something.

So you reckon it's plural?

Pleased I havent disappointed you, however I feel TP deserves whatever punishment you feel inclined to impose.

the singular of data is datum, so i think that - if a word such as anecdata was in any way meaningful - it would be plural.

a slight admonishment and sent on her way with a box of chocs. you, on the other hand, deserve quite different treatment.

I,m not? sorry, I will settle for a wee grin

you'll settle for remedial courses in manners and english.

and why do most kids in separated relationships end up with mum? is it because all those nasty single parents spread malicious rumours about those abusive dads, or is it because most blokes clear off and leave the mum to bring up the kids, cos they wouldn't contemplate taking this on full-time? as someone who has personal and professional experience of this, i would suggest to you that the latter is far more likely an explanation (if you want to generalise grossly) than the former.

i don't disagree with the notion that family law courts and disputes could be handled much better, i completely agree that children benefit greatly benefit from active involement with both parents (and extended family) wherever possible following separation, but i certainly don't agree that any presumption of "shared care" (however you want to define that) should be a guiding principle of such arrangements. nor do i agree with a group of quasi-misogynist evangelists, who have repeatedly been shown to be of quite dubious natures,

So fathers 4 justice reckon that tonight there has been an 'attack' on women members of the facebook page by mumsnet members.

Seems a bit..paranoid, no?

http://www.facebook.com/Fathers4Justice (<-- probs need a facebook account to see)

(I love internet drama)

My grammar and spelling are possibly in need of improvement, my manners however are impeccable.

if you really believe that you are in greater need of the courses i proposed than i thought

Even if when together both people are perfectly good parents, when people split things sometimes get bitter, spiteful and embattled and sometimes one or both will use/fail to resist using/feel justified in using one or more of a range of 'weapons' at their disposal. Sometimes that's about kids and access. If women more often get main custody of kids then it would perhaps look like restricting access of the NRP to the kids is 'something women do' rather than men because they have more opportunities to do so. There is no reason that I know of to believe that men would be more or less likely to do so with the same opportunities.

they are batshit. And they need to grow up.

And it's not as if family courts haven't heard it all before.

Actually there is a very interesting history of why women are favoured when it comes to who gets custody, and it has nothing to do with who the courts 'side' with, except that they side with the children's best interest.

innit. There are some good groups out there who genuinely help fathers when they need it, for court hearings etc. F4J need to realise that they risk them all getting tarnished with the same brush when they go on these pointless crusades, and it may actually put some men off asking those sorts of charities for help.

it's also worth pointing out that ~90% of people sort things out between themselves, without recourse to lawyers and family courts. the 10% of people currently who do resort to family courts and cafcass often have a vast range of background factors that influence and affect the decisions made in court, for better or for worse. laws and policy should be formulated on the good of the majority, not the knee-jerk reactions of a vocal (and often hysterical) minority, imo.

I don't envy them when they have to untangle accusations and counter accusations and try to get to the truth of it all in those cases where it does come to that.

Christ. I've never been a huge fan of Mumsnet but F4J are making them seem like saints in comparison.

WTF is that 'evidence of hatred' link about with a nothing profile of a supposed woman saying she hates all women, phrased in a very obvious jokey way? That's evidence of an attack against fathers for justice?

My opinion too, backed up by the fact that when members of F4J turn up on Urban they generally turn out to be utter pricks. (IIRC one was banned for being a misogynistic arse).

Also just wanted to say excellent posts by CRI, Nigel, Weepiper and trash pony (and probably some others I've forgot).

Totally agreed, there clearly are problems with the family court system but the idea that the above assumption should be placed above the best interests of the child is one of the reasons why I think F4J are group I'd advise anyone against joining.

if you don't assume shared care then you don't even begin to solve this problem of disappearing Dads. on even the most basic level the first step towards changing a cultural norm is expecting a different kind of behaviour. frankly i think that alot of the anti-Dad assumptions expressed mainly by the blokes on this thread are rather odd. i am thankfully nowhere near having sprogs, but if i were i would surely be reassured to know that in the event of a messy breakdown in the relationship with my partner the legal system wouldn't display a severe institutional bias against me.

genuinely can see no reason why any potential Dad would think otherwise, other than through a mistaken presumption that inside every woman there is some kind of angel who is immune to irrational rage, malice, jealousy or just confusion. a biased law in the hands of anyone with any single one of these qualities is a dangerous thing.

play the F4J bogey card all you like, the logic of a few of the arguments on here is downright circular, not to mention speculatory and presumptuous.

Family Court does not adjudicate maintenance issues (in England), in fact, the court takes a dim view on parents who use lack of maintenance as a reason to withhold contact.

Can you give any examples of anti dad assumptions that are being posted here?

I enjoyed the insinuation that some dads deserve less contact with their children because they have failed to challenge the predominating employment culture in which women are assumed to be primary carers.

Good old Mikey. Still finding it impossible to admit that he might be wrong.

Thats hardly 'anti dad' is it?

No, but I was just reminded of it now because I missed the opportunity to respond to it when it was first posted.

There's been a lot of poor arguments on both sides here.

Thing is, if you know it can be used against you, then you need to swallow it, if not for your own sake, then for the sake of the children. It doesn't do kids any good to be exposed to any sort of naked anger, even when it isn't aimed at them, by either of their parents. It's not fair and it's not "right", but realistically, it's the current operational climate: Get angry in a way that can be reported on to the Family Court and you will pay for it, so exercising a bit of self-control then working the anger off in a gym or summat when you're alone pays dividends.

No-one has said that he has no right to be angry. They've said that you shouldn't manifest that anger where the kids can see it, because it's damaging to them, and he shouldn't manifest it where his ex-partner can see it, because she'll be able to use it against him. Perfectly rational things to say, and nothing at all like "he's got no right to be angry".

What's amusing is that the gender stereotypes urge us to believe that it's only women who can't control their emotions, and yet here we have loads of men almost crying out for the "right" to be able to show theirs!

When Mr spirals ex's kicks off about him seeing his little un we just have to grit our teeth and remain calm, polite and reasonable. We were getting frequent threats about withholding access/visits which only stopped when we asked her to attend mediation. We were warned by our solicitor to expect false allegations from her (as that happened during the last access hearing). Some people can't see past their own hurt/anger/ feelings to see the impact their behaviour has on their children but as an adult, whatever sex you are, you need to focus on what is best for your little un. Two days after mr spirals ex kicked off big time about me, we had to attend a meeting about his little un with her there. You just grit your teeth and remember who you are there for and try not to let it get to you.

What struck me is male and female posters here used similar words to describe F4J members back in the "Batman" days, which heralded the arrival of batboy, keen to defend his fellow-dads.
Of course, there's no mileage in an advert that shows posters, a majority of whom are male, calling F4J members such names, is there?
Whoa, pressure group being opportunistic!!! There's a surprise!

BTW, I take "Rape. Male" to mean that rape is males-only pursuit, that women don't/can't/won't rape.