Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

The Name Mumsnet sexist?

238 replies

smthchri · 18/03/2012 13:42

I have a question. Is this site for Parenets or mums? are only mums parents?

OP posts:
BeerTricksPott3r · 19/03/2012 00:08

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BeerTricksPott3r · 19/03/2012 00:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Honeydragon · 19/03/2012 00:06

Get thee over to our legal boards and start a thread for that

F4J is sore point here at the mo, so good plan on subject changing.

Which leads me to Dragon Butter.......

Grin
Original poster
smthchri · 19/03/2012 00:01

The last order was made in November. where I said I wanted the Christmas contact this year as I had never had them for Christmas before. we had agreed in the pressance of 2 solisitors. I wanted this agreement to be in writing. The courts refused it to be in writing. We agreed I was to have my children all Christmas and she would have them new years. I normally have them every other sat or Sunday and Wednesday evening, with more contact on the holidays. She decided on Christmas day (it was at the weekend this year) to turn up at my home with lots of her family (this never normally happens) to take to boys home where she threatened to call the police. She later told me it was not in writing so she would not do it. SO I am now waiting to go back to court, letters going back and forth. My childrens motther is making it hard to go back to court as she has appointed a solisitor, but not instructed them and is ignoring all letters. so delaying thing yet again. And your right this is off topic..The point is . But this sort of behavior and the courts allowing it to happen I feel is what F4J is trying to put right. who mentioned F4j anyway? change the subject. PLEASE!

OP posts:
BeerTricksPott3r · 19/03/2012 00:01

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

OMGBFP · 18/03/2012 23:52

In my head I think in the logo that the figures in the middle are a toddler on his Daddy's shoulders.

VegimalStyle · 18/03/2012 23:43

And this is MNs name and logo's fault how?
Btw I always thought the logo was a riff on Charlie's angels and kinda cool...

BeerTricksPott3r · 18/03/2012 23:42

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
smthchri · 18/03/2012 23:37

I feel it is not in the childrens best interest where either the mother or the father can basicly just make up bad things to say about each other. If the courts started Punishing such behavior only really and relevant "issues" would come to light. At the moment the most they will do is stop listening to the parent making things up, as the mother of my children found out. And yet she still makes things up telling them in court. The court just does not listen. The lies she made up stopped my seeing my children for a good 9 months. The lies delayed the initial court system by another 18 months.. saying that 4 years and 8 court orders later I am waiting to go back to court soon following Christmas.

OP posts:
MamaMaiasaura · 18/03/2012 23:36

Knew it. Spidey senses tingled.

If you actually posted about your situation you'd have prob gotten support.

This has fuck all to do with mn logo and everything to do with attacking a very supportive site under the deluded view that mumsnet have a part to play in your child residency issues.

If you are here to be a pain in the arse kindly fuck off elsewhere. This is a supportive site but it pisses me right off when morons come on here attacking it for no sound or good reason

DioneTheDiabolist · 18/03/2012 23:35

Smthchri, I hear you. The family courts are in need of an overhaul. I think that they have failed to evolve and keep up with the society that they serve.

You say that F4J are protesting about the court system. As far as I can see, their latest campaigns have been to protest a charity, this website and a well known retail chain. I believe that they too have failed to evolve. I understand the need for publicity when new, however over a decade has passed and that's still all they seem to be doing.

What real work have they done to progress the right of fathers who are wrongfully denied access to their children?

SweetTheSting · 18/03/2012 23:33

technodad, I am loving that 'blimey'.

technodad · 18/03/2012 23:30

Blimey, that has nothing to do with MN or their logo!

If you had posted a thread asking for advice from others who had been through the courts in similar situations, you probably would have got some excellent advice from the community!

I think you have miss judged MN as the cause of your (and others like you) situation, whereas they might actually be something that could help (assuming you stop quoting from Wikipedia).

BIWI · 18/03/2012 23:27

I thought you were here to join MN, smthchri? And to complain about our name?

BeerTricksPott3r · 18/03/2012 23:25

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Honeydragon · 18/03/2012 23:23

So basically you're here to mostly talk about F4J then?

Original poster
smthchri · 18/03/2012 23:21

F4J are protesting about the courts system.. Having been both a Child threw this system and many years later a father. I feel strongly that F4J are right even if I don't always approve of their methods. On more than one occasion I have been to court and have walked away with a court order in my favor only to find out it is unenforceable, and basically useless and a waste of time and money. And on more than one occation I have been to court and had a court order drawn up where I knew it was unenforceable where the court would not make the order water tight (for want of a better word) as they did not want to get involved.. then only a few months later find myself going back to court as the order was broken.. well contact was not what we agreed in court (not in the order) to change the order to the way I said it would have to be before.

Basicly I feel the court system at the moment is long, drawn out process. Where all this has been done before. I am sure their must be a more streamlined system possible.. where lies told on either side should be punished.

OP posts:
Honeydragon · 18/03/2012 23:18

The op must have some serious issues with Daddies sauce, Mr Muscle, Wagamama and Fairy Liquid. Topshop and Topman? How do you get anything done?

technodad · 18/03/2012 23:16

smthchri,

Wikipedia is brilliant isn't it!

I am not sure the relevance of the Domino's cut and paste though. Yes they changed their name, but when they had 4 restaurants, they would be idiots to change it now that they have an international brand name (and so would MN).

Why did their name "evolve" in a non-gender specific way? That is like saying that any brand name with a gender specific name in it is sexist. "Gale's Nail Bar" - Stone the witch for using her name in her title - men won't be allowed in there to pay good money for her services!

I think you need to get a grip mate. If you are going to try to argue this strange subject, then you will need to find something that is relevant.

MamaMaiasaura · 18/03/2012 23:02

Mumsnet is constantly evolving, that's because it's got forward thinking people in it. I've been here almost 8 years and it changes with times. The name is the name, it doesn't need rebranding. It's clear op is a bridge dweller and member of FFJ and it is groups like that, which aren't rooted in support but in bullying tactics that need to grow the fuck up and evolve

DioneTheDiabolist · 18/03/2012 23:01

Smthchri, what did you tell your GF when she asked you why you were here?

BIWI · 18/03/2012 22:58

But why should mumsnet evolve?

BeerTricksPott3r · 18/03/2012 22:57

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

confusedpixie · 18/03/2012 22:56

honey: The helicopter Confused

OP: He changed the name of the store before it became a household name, totally different scenario...

MamaMaiasaura · 18/03/2012 22:56

Beer offers a fair deal me thinks