AIBU to think that if MN are willing to boycott certain groups on ethical grounds

[APartridgeAmongThePigeons]

they really should take a look at banning posters proclaiming themselves MRAs?

Sexist,

often racist,

frequently rape/ domestic violence deniers

I know that mumsnet want to keep a lively discussion going and not ban free speech but when they join a forum mainly used by women it's hard to believe it's not about being goady and spewing propaganda.

The result is that normal posters get angry..
engage...

And then get deleted or banned for "personal attack".

Using a nasty word for someone who has by just stating that they are an MRA has basically said you don't matter as a human seems the normal response.

Earth, one problem doesn't have to trump another. That's what it means.
I'm on my phone, I'll get you some MRA/men's issues websites when I can. I'm sure there are some threads on here that will show elements of moderate issues

Prompting a DM article.....

There was a very infamous story from F4J about a father "jailed for sending a text' to his child. What F4J neglected to inform us was that the text contained a death threat to the mother. It's all smoke and mirrors in the mens rights organisations.

I have to depart the discussion now, Kim, thanks for your thoughts which I'll try to respond to tomorrow, plus sabrina's patriarchy stuff.

Laters.

MRA groups are hate groups.

"In its latest quarterly publication “The Year in Hate and Extremism” (Issue 45, Spring 2012) the Southern Poverty Law Center, or SPLC, names Men’s Rights Activists as a hate group, citing the MRAs’ — alternately known as “Father’s Rights Activists” — virulent misogyny, spreading of false anti-woman propaganda and applauding and even encouraging acts of domestic terrorism and extreme violence against women and children, up to and including murder. "

radfemworldnews.wordpress.com/2012/03/09/southern-poverty-law-center-names-mens-rights-activists-mras-as-hate-group/

Yes, there is obviously much more information that that linked article about the father, is leaving out. Courts do not reduce access on the say so of the mother. Their remit is to put children first.

Sigmond has to do the washing up, there's your answer Sabrina

Actually, I'm going to leave sabrina with this. It's an enlightening, completely non-MRA read about family courts..

exinjuria.wordpress.com/2013/10/17/an-exercise-in-absolute-futility-chapter-seven/

I was making a sandwich actually.

A patriarchy joke

Oh and the SPLC withdrew their statement that AVFM was a hate site. Stay current eh?

Was it, oh a 'sammich' then!!

Sigmund, that link is to an anti feminist blog. I linked to parliamentary papers. You need to provide a more credible source for your claims.

They still name on their site AVFC as a hate group.

www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/misogyny-the-sites

Treen, that's where you and I will have to disagree. The structural inequalities experienced by women are, in my opinion, far more significant than those experienced by men. I could provide you with some data to support this view, but I'm on my phone right now :)

Just look at the world around you. Who is earning less, who is more likely to be in positions of power, who tends to be poorer? It is clear that women get a worse deal than men.

I got as far as "the feminism challenge is to destroy the family..." Sorry, but I don't buy that. Feminists don't want to destroy the family - I myslef have a fully functioning family - and pretty traditional set up too.

But, but, what if feminism is allowing women not to put up with abusive relationships? Not to just stay together, in an awful relationship, just because that's the 'done' thing? Because women are equals and deserve not to be abused. Well, then, maybe women being able to leave a bad relationship is a good thing. Being able to support herself, and being able to call on the father of her children to pay something towards them - that's a good thing, yes?

OK, how about someone who actually works in the field of family separation/family courts and worked with the government agencies?

This is her response to the article you rejected:

'This is a clearly analysed exposition of the what I have come to understand about the sector that I work in. This, more than anything is why the UK suffers fatherlessness on the most appalling scale. Working as I do with generational family separation, I know that unless we begin to dismantle this, we will never begin to restore the relationships between children and their fathers which have been discarded in the name of feminism. Thank you Ex Injuria for your careful and diligent work, only by writing our own narratives and providing our own analyses will we change the future for our children. Just as second wave feminists became active in all spheres of policy and practice, it is time for an equalities movement which provides its own research, Studies and written and verbal response to the troubles of our time.'

More:

karenwoodall.wordpress.com/2013/08/18/no-blacks-no-irish-no-dads/

Really am going now.

It's Karen Woodall!!

No that is an individual. I can get a feminist who works in the family courts to write a very different opinion piece.

I linked to parliamentary papers. If fathers were really disadvantaged in the family courts, and I have never seen any evidence they are, then you should be able to produce some official evidence.

The truth is you can't, because it is not true.

You may as well incite Erin Pizzey and her 'women want to abused' rhetoric.

Earth, no problem it's the curse of the phone. They maybe statistically more significant but you know how it is. People will involve their perspective and situation. Many families that lose a child in street violence will start a charity after the fact. Your circumstances will effect what issues you get involved with.
You don't provide statistics to a family of a son that has killed himself, to show that it's less significant than a daughter killing themselves.
It's hard to detach your own experience. People will rightly focus on whichever issues they want. You shouldn't rank them

Of course people focus on issues that concern them. Saving worms, whatever. That is their choice. But you don't tell lies to get your cause noticed.

Yes Treen, the phone is an imperfect tool for accessing the internet, and similarly, the internet is an imperfect tool for communicating. For example, it's hard to tell from words on a screen* whether someone is being deliberately disingenuous, or if they're just really, really thick :)

*come back SM!

Of course, gingerbread say that the real problem to single parents (mostly women) is poverty. Of course, a real cause of poverty is the fact that women are mainly left as the carers of the children (left unable to work because of childcare issues, or unable to progress high earning careers), and in 3/5 cases not paid any maintenance by the fathers.