AIBU to be a Feminist and support Fathers' rights?

[messyisthenewtidy]

Putting aside all the acrimony of this weekend, of the hurtful accusations that have flown back and forth regarding false allegations/ likelihood of child abuse, etc, etc....

It seems to me that, as feminists who believe that men should be sharing in childcare and housework and are raising our sons to be egalitarian husbands, that we should support an automatic 50/50 split of custody for their benefit and in the interests of equality (except in cases of DV and child abuse).

So I wanted to know how many here believe in that principle of automatic shared custody (but are just put off by FNJ's aggressive tactics and MRA's constant painting of women as false accusers)?

PS. so NOT a troll, been here for yonks , am just trying to sort this out in my head..

That's a pity as a good few women do have my own stance which is very pro equality which means chidlren with fathers 50% of time, women work full time, men do loads of child care etc etc. I am also very against lower earners being paid out to by higher earners no divorce (I having paid out to a man on divorce). There will be a lot of us with huge sympathy for F4J and what is does and wants. I think it should also seek to deal with fathers who have no contact with children or want all or nothing or we need a mothers4justice to force men to have or even see their children.

Xenia

Is everything in life always this black and white for you?

Xenia out of interest, how do you see 'forcing' parents to see their children actually working in practice?

Messy - it's difficult to take it at face value now isn't it? Which is a shame because I think eveyone on this board shares the view that children benefit hugely from regular contact with good fathers. It's one of the reasons I chose our childminder actually - her husband works with her and the more examples of men taking on an equal role in parenting my DS and DD have the better as far as I'm concerned.

I have some sympathy with (some of) Xenia's point of view actually. I think there are women out there who don't think they can do things for themselves and expect a man to always rescue them BUT I don't know how someone works FT and also does "loads of childcare". And that's why I absolutely don't have huge sympathy for F4J! From their actions and statements they dont actually seem to want shared parenting, they just want to WIN. I think their approach just perpetuates the combative nature of some custody issues.

How can you 'force' a parent to have contact? I would not like to send my kids off with a resentful parent to whom they are a massive chore. How could that be in their best interests? I may even refuse. In which case I'd be branded a bitter harpy withholding contact for no good reason, wouldn't I?

' I said I'd take them, didn't I? What more do you want, ffs?'

to answer the OP, no of course not. I am a feminist and I think fathers should have rights to their children as long as there no reason for them not to have rights to their children iyswim. The same applies to mothers.

I think the difficulty over access arises because in the vast majority of families, mothers do the lion's share of the caring. That shouldn't still be the case but it is. So in that case I think it's probably right that they get custody. I'm not sure that 50:50 works for very young children.

If the parents had genuinely, truly split the care (which is the case in some families) - then I think both parents should have equal rights to custody and it's very difficult then to work out how to divide the children's time without making their lives horrible. In those cases, I have sympathy with the families need fathers crew. But most times, they are just making idiots of themselves.

Messy: Problem is, I sauntered over to F4J to invite them into the discussion in a nice friendly manner but they deleted the post. The other night when the Big War was going on, there were quite a few conciliatory posts made by Mumsnetters on their facebook page but they deleted them all, so it appears that they are only interested in portraying Mumsnet as extremists to their members and not the lovelies that we are. I guess it helps their ad campaign....

I really do believe F4J don't want anyone on their side - seems to me, from the comments on their page, that they enjoy revelling in conflict and bitterness. Got to feel sorry for them really. I think the fact that the majority of mumsnetters are not only there to support one another but are married with husbands, brothers, fathers and sons they love very much speaks volumes!

Yes Suzy, conflict and bitterness are the words! Makes me wonder whether in some cases that is why they don't see their children - my SIL never wanted to see her dad for access visits because all it consisted of was traipsing round gadget shops listening to him whine about how awful his life was and what a bitch her mother was. She found those days deeply upsetting and confusing and did everything she could to get out of them.

Also amuses me how they hijacked mumsnet with their advertising campaigns and took over the MN message boards yet no-one from mumsnet is welcome on their site. Not, I hasten to add that I'd want to join their page - if there was a mothers 4 justice, then yes, maybe. The calendar is a fantastic idea though - what a great present for their ex wives/girlfriends - they can use it as a dartboard

That's my last word - bored with the lot of them. Seems the media is bored with their antics too. They've done wonders for M&S though - bet their sales figures have soared this week!

I really hope I have misunderstood suzy82's comments as I am offended by them. I don't see how it's relevant that I don't have a wife or sister standing by me (blame my parents and mother nature for that one). My marriage broke down, it happens to a lot of people. Some are to blame, other aren't, sometimes it just happens eg. I got married too young. Even my XW would admit that she changed and grew up, I didn't. However, that makes no difference to the love I have for my two innocent (well in this respect innocent anyway).

My cousin is 3 months older than me and we were as close as brother and sister, she was even my best "man" at my wedding.

My situation is not stand alone. My situation is not stand alone though. 3 close friends of mine are having similar situations as well as a colleague at works brother. She is regularly coming to me for advice as to how to handle things.

One friends has just seen his daughter for the first time in 3 years. After 5 broken court orders and his XW moving address several times he has finally had what he decribed as the " happiest moment of his life".

Yes there are a lot of missing fathers out there and they should be made to at the very least provide economic stability for their children but there are a lot of us who are not the bitter and twisted souls we are made out to be. We are loyal and loving fathers who want to do the right thing for our children.

From a feminism point of view I would have thought this argument would have sat with you all well. We are arguing that we are equal parties.

No no no hawkes I think maybe she was just defending herself against the accusations from f4j that we hate men over here! Cos we don't. You must understand that to see that picture of the little boy with the insults written on his body was awful. Because most of us would cut our tongues out before saying any of those words to our DSs.

Just like it was hurtful for anyone to imply all f4j members hate women when they obviously love their daughters very much. It's just f4j leadership's deletion policy shows they're not interested in portraying Mumsnet as anything other than a breeding ground for extremist man haters.

Off to bed. Have a

Absolutely messy! Hawksey, just as you found my comment offensive that's exactly how we find (some of the) fathers 4 justice members and their comments that all MNers are man hating harpies. They could have used MN as a forum to help their cause rather than alienating a vast portion of members. I really do think they need to rethink their PR and tactics! You, however sound like a nice bloke and I wish you well

It's probably worth remembering that the majority of separated parents reach a comfortable level of arrangements that suit all concerned, kids get time with both parents, parents get both time with the DC they love and time to themselves, and everything works out OK.

I would really like to ask them what percentage of the 4 million children fathers are:

Dead
In prison
Don't believe they are the father
Have been abusive or have a committed past crimes which deems them unfit
Refuse to see their children
Have serious mental health issues or addictions

With the exception of paternity no court would give a women custody if they were any of the above.

I am sure most feminists are with Hawksey on being against women demanding contact, even if they don't go for my stance of 50% forced contact on all men whether they like it or not.

What I would like are the statistics - how many children whose fathers have no contact and the children and mothers want that v how many fathers denied contact.

I suspect the disappearing act men have done since the dawn of mankind through Genghis Khan, the Vikings and now to our council estates (and even middle class families like mine) is the bigger problem although both are pernicious.

Xenia

Even a father insists he wants contact it isn't always for wholesome or altruistic reasons

As a SM of DSSs who have been in 50:50 shared residency between DP and his exW for many years now, I think that 50:50 is a very desirable state of affairs providing certain material conditions can be met. The most basic of those is the requirement for the separated/divorced parents to live physically so close to one another that there is no disruption to their school routine and extra-curricular activities and friendships by virtue of having two homes.

There is a particular twist on 50:50 residency quite common in France whereby all the children from all of a couple's previous relationships are gathered under one roof for 50% of the time, and then the couple, which doesn't usually have (a) child(ren) together, gets 50% of their time alone and childfree. This is very convenient for parents who can then have time to travel for work and live a generally carefree life 50% of the time.

Children don't generally like never being alone at home with their parent and new DP without their stepsiblings, however. This situation is particularly tough on children where they have lots of stepsiblings on both the maternal and paternal sides.

My BIL does that. He only has his DC when his new partner's DC are at home. If they are with their father, he has time alone with his new DP.

I can see it from the adults POV, but I think his DC might like some time with him without their new step siblings.

"I suspect the disappearing act men have done since the dawn of mankind through Genghis Khan, the Vikings and now to our council estates (and even middle class families like mine) is the bigger problem although both are pernicious."

Xenia, yes, the bad reputation that men* have earned as fathers is probably down to that historical disappearing act which is in turn is down to biology and women being the ones left with the egg.

With the advent of capitalism and the idea of passing property down the paternal line, paternity became more important and I'm guessing at that point a lot of fathers became emotionally attached to their offspring. Before that, I believe that maternal uncles were the most important male role models in some societies.

Biology and history aside though, I generally subscribe to the Phoebe theory of parenthood: the more loving adults a child has, the better.

*disclaimer - I refer to men as a collective historical entity with no reference to individual men of the modern variety

wordfactory - the situation is quite a good childcare solution really, if you are very busy at work with lots of travel etc. Divorce, and you only have to worry about your children half the time...

Yes, so do I, messy. My younger ones have 3 adult siblings and they have nothing but gained from that as I am sure they did with from their nanny who worked here for 10 years etc etc. I also think children benefit if wider relatives are around too. I do not think they find it easy though to be taken from parents and placed in kibbutz situations nor boarding schools at 8. I think they need to attach to a few primary and constant adults in their lives who need to be blood relatives (adoptions can work etc). The myth that they should only have one such loved person is the way many men have kept women down.

Countless housewife mumnetters have let themselves be lured into the view that mother knows best and under 5s need mother there 24/7. Nothing does women more harm in professional terms and to ensure men and women then do not obtain economic parity.