If Fathers for Justice invade again

[Nyac]

will they still be welcome?

I'm referring to the thread in the Feminism/Women's Rights section -

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a1419965-Agenda-much

where Justine said:

"an invasion - ie let's go on and tell those mumsnetters why they've got it all wrong - isn't necessarily the same as trolling tbh (ie deliberately misleading/antagonising). I think we ought to be able to be robust enough to be able to debate the issue, with the caveat, of course, that if visitors turn out merely to be here to wind up or hear to spread hatred then they are not welcome"

It appears that as long as they promote their agenda in PARD then no harm done. Is that a fair assessment?

They're still having our posts deleted and demanding freedom of speech.

How very hypocritical.

really mumsnet???? i want a copy of what i said and your reason for deleting. i didn't break guidelines and i did not defame.

two posts i see.

there was no defammation and no personal attack in those posts.

mcmooncup

What is your view spydii on supporting paedophiles as part of your 'fight'?

• My view? I wouldn't have them anywhere near me, my kids, anyone else, their kids or F4J. But, why even ask unless you are trying to suggest otherwise. If someone is a convicted peado and you have information about this, pm me and I'll look into it for you. Think about it, why would 'any' organisation want someone like associated with them.

I have seen a father's handmaiden new girlfriend post on your FB page - they both appear to be active members yet I KNOW him to be a convicted paedophile. Is it your view that the mother and courts are correct to not encourage contact with the children?

• Again, my view. No, kids should not be exposed to a convicted peado. But I'm assuming here that you are being accurate in the allegation, and I have to say i hear this a lot only to find when it's investigated that it's little more than malicious gossip. That is not to take away from a genuine case which is serious, so let me know and I'll make sure it's followed up on.

p.s. If you are gender neutral why are you called Fathers for Justice? Just out of interest. Who are fathers being 'done over by'?

• Probably because the day it was started it was kicked off by a bloke unable to at that time see his kids. It was a logical name. It became globally known and as things evolved mums started coming for help and have been offered it. There's no bias, but it's the real world we're dealing mostly with dads because as the stats show it's predominantly a dad issue in private law. In public law it's predominantly a mum issue and more is being done there but there are also other groups focussing specifically on that.

Thanks to the bigotry and prejudice of organisations like Gingerbread and Mumsnet, the epidemic of fatherlessness continues with catastophic social consequences.

From the F4J Facebook page

HTH

MN has more members, more publicity and more people looking to it for comment. Publicity by association. Perhaps why they targeted Gingerbread too?

what help do you offer?

i see from your website you don't have a helpline and the only phone number given out is stated to be purely for journalists.

They are targeting to initimidate. They don't want any criticism. Hence the legal threats and post deletions.

yes - please do elaborate on: Thanks to the bigotry and prejudice of organisations like Gingerbread and Mumsnet, the epidemic of fatherlessness continues with catastophic social consequences. (from your official fb page)

swallowed a fly,

I think I have now answered the question, as soon as I saw it. Also note my posts are being deleted. Don't know why, not been rude or inappropriate and trying to engage in reasonable discussion.

They help give Louis de Bernieres a platform and focal point for his misogynistic rantings, like the one we saw in the Daily Mail today. Does that count?

and could you please explain why your official promotion materials repeatedly state that '1 in 3 children in this country are fatherless when that is a complete fabrication?

It has been said to several posters by more than one person both on the boards and on FB. I can't remember who by but all of them seemed to be there as a supporter of F4J.

FTR, I disagree with F4J's standpoint. That is my opinion and I am entitled to it. It does not make me a man hater, or a child abuser, or a bad mother. I am interested in debating it, but I am not interested in being shouted down, threatened, being made the subject of personal attacks or anything else. Please remember that we didn't start this, F4J spammed the MN FB page, several of your members made offensive comments and then followed us here (even the ones who didn't post) when they found out we were talking about it.

I appreciate it must be very difficult to be separated from your child. I appreciate that to not be able to bring them up must be heartbreaking. But no one on this forum is to blame for that, we are all just normal people trying to live our lives as best we can. We are not mouthpieces for Mumsnet, we are just people on a discussion forum. Your members have done your organisation no favours in their behaviour over the past week.

While you're here, this question was put to another member of F4J's management or whatever they're called but was completely ignored. What evidence does F4J have that ALL 3.8 million children living in single mother households are fatherless?

also does it concern you that you have no screening of members particularly when they are men who have been deemed unfit to see their own children by a court of law? do you think in all those cases that is because of the corruption of the court or do you acknowledge that many of them will be genuinely unfit to be around children eg: have sexually or physically abused children or have problems so serious of whatever kind that they are just not safe to be with children? do you feel uncomfortable with this?

I'll read the Daily Mail if necessary for research purposes, but if anyone points me towards Captain Corelli's Fecking Mandolin I'm out.

lots of questions - look forward to reading your frank answers given you are interested in genuine debate and discussion.

re help, we publish a guidebook and have an online forum where people can ask questions.

Re 1 in 3, it's not something I've checked myself but I will. What I am aware of is that the team are very careful not to publish anything that cannot be substantiated by official figures so I'm guessing it's legitimate.

and you do realise that some of those single parent households will be headed by men? some will have 50:50 division of contact time? some will be households where the father is actually dead? some will be children conceived by donor sperm? many will be children whose fathers refuse all contact? etc.

given all of that would you agree that your advertising is misleading to say the least?

Ok, let me get this straight. A MNer starts a thread on MN saying that she is not happy with F4J being on the MN FB page and posting their porny/BDSM campaign photo.

A whole bunch of MNers come on the thread and give their opinion of F4J.

Members of F4J say 'shut the fuck up MNers or we'll have the law on you/get on to your advertisers'.

Is that about right?

And these trolls harassing us are being tolerated why exactly?

...for £20 a year.

spydii it is not legitimate. that's not an opinion - that is a fact.

if the children in this country who are 'fatherless' accounted for 1 in 3 children there wouldn't be very many children at all.

i'm surprised you haven't 'checked' the details of a campaign you are throwing yourself behind. you're presenting yourself as officially involved in the organisation but don't know the basics of your campaign?

i'd love to know what i got deleted for BC

You've not checked out the 1 in 3 figure?