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

You only see them as porn if your sick mind allows you to, we have a serious campaign to fight and children are prohibited from speaking out. Audience research is done in such campaigns and I can assure you your twisted look at things is very untypical of normal people.

No member of F4J has moved 'swiftly' to attack anyone without evidence or reason, the opposite is evident in this thread for all to see. So, as I say, keep the insults flying because you're helping the public see what you're about.

We do fight for reform of the CSA, in fact there are many of us that would rather scarp the whole mess and start up better approaches. That said, it's not a priority. Stopping the emotional / psychological abuse of kids is so that is the focus.

Who says F4J doesn't understand psychological or financial abuse, it's the very basis of many of the things being asked for. Been listening to some of the detractors here, who love to misrepresent?

You know which children suffer the most psychological and emotional abuse? Those that live with abusive parents and suffer/witness abuse from them.

Who do you think suffers when child maintainance isn't paid?

Of course all mothers spend that on hats and buns, so it's not like it takes food out of children's mouths

Does F4J really believe that organisations such as Gingerbread have a 'hidden agenda' against fathers, and that they have a secret agenda to 'keep the abuse going' because it is profitable?

Just don't ask them about the grassy knoll

Why do F4J deny the pscychological effects of witnessing your father beating up your mother and why do they think it's a good idea to hand over vulnerable children to abusive men?

What exactly is the abuse that Gingerbread is supposedly inflicting on children?

Well, where else do we see gagging? I can only think of it being used in porn, BDSM or abuse. Hence why so many of us are drawing the link. I believe it was beerTrickspotter who posted alternative campaigns that could have been used?

On a side note, I forwarded the poster to a friend who has no affiliation with Mumsnet, was not involved with the discussion or whatever. His initial reaction was a comment on the sadistic streak of it.

Also, very uncomfortable with the way Paula Yates has been spoken about on this thread. I don't have anything to add to what's been said in her defence. I just hope to high heaven that none of the people labelling her as "selfish", or an unfit mother find themselves in that state of mind.It's devastating to see someone in that state of mind, where they genuinely believe that they will be doing those around them a favour by taking their lives. It doesn't make things any easier for these people to see such vitirol towards suicide victims.

And could we please have an answer to these questions. I asked politely on your FB page, before you guys deleted me (I wasn't being vicious, may I add... I had genuine questions... But your lot don''t like that, do you?)

What do you intend to do about fathers who refuse to see their children?
What do you intend to do about fathers who are willing to see their children living in poverty, because they refuse to pay child support?
What do you intend to do to ensure that abusers do NOT get granted access so they can continue to abuse their ex partners or their children?

''We do fight for reform of the CSA, in fact there are many of us that would rather scarp the whole mess and start up better approaches.''

Such as?

There are two simple changes they could make to remove the dodginess of the image they've chosen to use.

I'm not going to tell them though

OK then. Why does your "founder" ( you know you could actually come and engage yourself you know? Rather than send along hapless sockpuppets) seek to minimise the experiences of myself and other posters on this thread (and therefore the experiences of our children, who F4J apparently care deeply about) by stating that fathers who voluntarily have minimal contact are a tiny minority, and that of those, the majority have probably been alienated and scared off by the mother? How can she say her organisation is not inherently misogynistic when she blames all contact disputes on the mother?

Further, if F4J's assertion is that a father is essential in a child's life, and that to keep a father out of his child's life is abuse, then do F4J believe that fathers who do behave as above are guilty of abuse by removing themselves from their child's life? Will they be campaigning for such fathers to be prosecuted? :)

Also, how can F4J justify trolling a helpline set up to help people in vulnerable situations? What do they hope to gain from trolling the FB pages of other organisations?

Allow me to put something into perspective ladies. And this is something I recently spoke about at Occupy to a very large crowd about. The state makes money and gains control by ending the institution of family. They have cut their teeth in private law and have sown up the game good and proper, closing off every loophole in overly justifiable 'reasons' for denying contact between father and child. I would not blame others for not realising, few if any of us do until we are confronted by it. The smartest thing ever done was to pitch the sexes against each other. Because now we have half the population at each others throats whilst children increasingly suffer. Once the system is perfected (we've got their folks) they start on women. And they have, in public law. In the past they removed children from the more disadvantaged parts of society so noone took notice. They are working their way up the society chain and are now focussing on the middle and working classes. Last year, 95,000 children were taking into care and the number is rocketing. These children are being removed for little or, in many cases, no reason. You are not meant to know nor can you find out - hence the whole secret family court campaigns. Look into it ladies, you're already in the firing line and you'll know about it when the neighbour you parked in front off reports you for having rowdy kids. F4J will be there to help so maybe reconsider the position of hatred for a group doing good work equally supporting all that lose their kids inappropriately. F4J, unlike others do not discriminate on basis of gender or any other criteria.

CSA - either enforceable court orders and/or a genuine version of the CSA properly set up. If you look into the CSA you'll find it's a money making scam designed to look like it's doing a good job. When it takes twice as much money to run as the government pay it, where do you think the funding comes from? You guessed it, money aid in but not passed on. The whole thing is a farce and serves only to wind up all sides. Governments love to create the illusion of not caring and if they happen to benefit from the fallout they create then all good for them... A proper fix comes from all parties working together in agreement for a good solution, whilst they've got us men and women at each others throats that won't happen. I know who's laughing at the sidelines on that one. All those making money out of this game.