Agenda, much?

[Malificence]

I don't usually wander onto the MN facebook page but I was pretty horrified to find what looks very much like an MRA agenda posted on there.
I'm trying very hard to see what relevance the photo used for their site has regarding the voices of unheard children. Looks more like how they would like to see their women to me.

www.facebook.com/#!/mumsnet?sk=wall

Isn't 'taking legal advice' one of the most pointless phrases in the world?

I can see MN having to involve the Police in this.

Also, no Nadine, we're not trying to say that 3.8 million children growing up without a father are doing so because the father is abusive. We're saying that 3.8 million children are NOT growing up without a father, that most of these kids see their dads on a regular basis, and that most fathers are happy with the amount of times they see their kids. We're saying that the tiny minority, which probably adds up to a few thousand, of dads who don't see their children either through refusal of contact by a court, or through the mothers refusal to let the dad see the child, in these cases, domestic violence is a real consideration.

Growing up in a different home to your father, is not the same as growing up fatherless. Growing up fatherless means your dear old dad is either dead, or has zero contact and input in your life.

Fake ETA - if you press shift and enter on facebook, you can form paragraph breaks. hth

so yet again we've got MRA's coming on here and reproducing our posts and user names elsewhere on hate sites. joy.

why police LineRunner?

Wouldn't blame Gingerbread if they did though.

I'm thinking organised intimidation of MN users; organised harrassment of a charity and its staff.

Indeed, we have. :( They decided to misquote me, to add fuel to the fire, although I can't find the post in question (was the one with the Amii poster on F4J) with the intention of making it look like I was tarring ALL fathers with the same brush.

F4J, do you realise just how petty you're making yourselves look right now?

Gingerbread have responded to F4J with this

All I'm going to say is THANK YOU GINGERBREAD!

I wonder if they'll just copy the first paragraph of that onto their site and claim victory.

Suprisingly, they haven't?

They've decided to dispute everything further.

love this, "Q: What is needed to support more cooperative parenting after separation?

Cooperative parenting needs to be established within couple families and early in a child?s life. This would provide a firmer foundation for the continued involvement of both parents should they separate. Encouraging the take-up of parental leave and flexible working options would help parents juggle the demands of paid employment with caring responsibilities.", from gingerbread.

re: if you want to be an equal parent with equal rights and responsibilities DO IT from the start not just suddenly want it when your relationship breaks up.

" Text the Jeremy Vine Show 88291. although I don't know the reasons for there speration maybe we can get our plight more coverage. Just sent this...."Critical ill father wants to trace his long lost son. Another two victims of our unfair and secretive family justice system? 1 in 3 children lose contact with there father permanently courtesy of our family courts"

From a F4J poster.

Really. REALLY? Why do I not know anyone who's permanently lost contact with their father or child in the courts? Why do I know of a woman who's ex was awarded supervised access to their daughter, despite sexually abusing her daughter (his step-daughter)

Why do I know countless mothers still forced to hand over their children to an abusive ex? Why is it that every man I know who has been to court over access has at least got supervised access? Are all of these men denied access living elsewhere? Is there some small island off the coast of Cornwall which refuses to give any fathers access? Only explanation I can think of.

I rather liked that too, SAF.

and the end of the day these are people who made the choices and arranged their lifestyles in such ways as to make the mother the primary childcarer. why would that change because they've now broken up?

if you decide you want the children to be at home with mum whilst you work full time, or you agree to that arrangement and only see your children for short periods and take little responsibility for hands on care then that is what you've chosen for those children. it doesn't change just because you've split up with the mother.

if you want to be a hands on dad and arrange your life and make your choices to make that happen then upon separation that too would continue.

all that happens is a continuity of what has gone before.

I think the place where 1 in 3 fathers lose contact is Planet MRA. The place with the feminist government.

Ahhhh, the bit about the feminist government still gets me... F4J are good for the comedy value.

PS. Where are these secret courts? Do we have to stand in the fireplace and shout Diagon Alley to find them?

exactly swc! you don't see many of these men jumping up and down for 50% responsiblity for children whilst they're married do you?

it's dead easy - the court looks and sees what the status quo is. if you want to be a highly involved parent after break up be so before break up.

that 1 in 3 is utterly ridiculous - my son is one of them and we've never been near a family court, his father chose never to see him despite my attempts to make him see sense. the figures from gingerbread give the facts of how few of these children go to family court and the miniscule proportion of those that do who aren't made to have contact with the father regardless of whether they want it or not.

likewise swc i don't know of any mothers who deny contact. what i have met far too many of is women who are either are coping with being bullied, messed around, let down and threatened by an ex through giving contact or trying to get them to see their child and women whose children's fathers choose not to see their child.

1 in 3 children lose contact with their fathers courtesy of family courts, so that means that there are what - only 900 children in the UK? What a muppet.

Similarly, of all the single parents I know I can't think of one who even wants to stop their child/ren seeing their father, let alone actually doing it. Aside from the obvious rights of the children which have already been extensively covered, in a couple of cases they are either exhausted or desperately needing more support from their ex, and have asked their ex outright to take more of an equal role and the ex has refused. In my own case I wanted to do things as equally as possible but this was apparently "using him". I know that my ex will never step up and take a more involved role and I desperately wish that wasn't the case.

Their "1 in 3 children lose contact with their father" stat is completely bogus.

Quote from their Facebook page:

"FACEBOOK TERMS & CONDITIONS

We have seen a large increase in the last couple of days of people joining our Facebook page. On further investigation of their own Facebook pages it is clear that many have come from or via Mumsnet with the sole intention of continuing their theme of attacking men and Fathers 4 Justice. This will not be tolerated.

We welcome intelligent debate and argument we do not welcome attacking people because of their gender, be it men or women. Likewise as I am sure you are all aware by now we do not tolerate posts from dads attacking women/mums and we are very vigilant in removing these posts and people.

Over a third of the supporters in F4J are women because when a dad is denied contact that affects their sisters, their own mothers (the grandmothers), their new wives and girlfriends and ultimately their female children. This is why it is so sad to see and read such hatred in the posts we have seen over the last week on Mumsnet. As far as I am concerned the failure to moderate those offensive posts can be interpreted as them being the view of Mumsnet the organisation. I wrote to them last night as the posts were becoming more libelous and I am sad to say that we are taking legal advice this morning on this matter as the posts continue to come in and have become even more serious.

While we are all shaped by our own personal circumstances we hope that you come to this campaign and Facebook page able to understand, or be prepared to understand the bigger picture. No one more than me had reason to set up Mothers4Justice but I did not because the only place that offered sensible help, advice and debate about the failing court system was Fathers 4 Justice.

Be under no illusion, this Facebook page is monitored not just by those with a personal axe to grind looking for information about their ex's, it is also monitored by the Police, Cafcass, NYAS, Family Courts and Legal professionals. It does our campaign no good if you then resort to the level of these people, and the sort of people posting gender hatred on other Forums.

Our focus is on equality. We are campaigning for the right of both parents to be treated equally in the family courts. Let others go down the road of in-equality. Nadine"

Actually, no, that's not right. I can't be arsed to do the maths but given that in 2010, only 300 contact cases were refused by the family court. If 1 in 3 kids are living without their dads because the family court has refused contact, that puts the total number of kids living in the UK at some ridiculously small number.