I’d like to hear more about the woman you took down, and the funding. Do you have my email address? teri@sharedparentingworks.org

thank you so much for the compliment! but all I do is tell the truth.

teri

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kathlyn-and-gay-hendricks/body-politics-what-mccain_b_130378.html

Any good therapist learns to read the language of the body, but you don’t need an advanced degree to understand John McCain’s. His patterns are about as subtle as the flashing lights on a sign that says “Danger Ahead.” Since we may end up married to him for four years, we need to pay particularly close attention to two patterns of his: smirking and jaw-clenching.

The HP thinks this is science? What’s next? Phrenology?

I’m also reading his book. Interesting that he mentions consulting with his image handlers at least once in the process – and I’m not that far into the book yet. Usually, I wouldn’t buy a book like this at all. I guess it might be an interesting investment, since it is leading to some media attention on the issues.

“If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”

Perhaps you are not aware that marriage and family law is now much more directly politically controlled than in the past, and that it is now regulated by the federal government. Family law, including parental rights issues, are political issues. Where the parties stand on family policy is directly related to the treatment fathers get in the family law machine. If you want to learn more about the history and cause of the major difficulties fathers are facing, there is information in this article and many others at MND.

This recent article may be of interest to you, as well as the following article published today: A Dire Warning for Families from the RNC.

Criminal judges and their wives sit on boards for groups that work with criminals. They are also great funders.

The criminal system thinks the FC system a joke and criminal lawyers reckon FC lawyers are the bottom of the barrel when it comes to lawyers.

So basically the FC is the worst run system and has a very bad reputation.

Women are having problems too because the FC people are changing to suit men when held accountable and if they can they will make a case last as long as possible just for the money.

I myself studied law as an adult and I couldn’t beleive how weak these people were. I can tell you honestly that lawyers have more problems in their own lives than the people they help. Same with counsellors.

Do any of you remember when people thought these people scum. And why?

Because they were the sick trying to help the sick. It is not about being on high. It is about being real and honest.

Teri Stoddard, says…

julie, it’s absolutely about funding. maybe in substance abuse it’s equal, but not in domestic violence. now I’m curious… since they have tons of substance abuse programs where women bring their children, do they have any for fathers where kids can stay?

Firstly Teri, I think so much of you. You are someone very special in our world.

OK, I will give you the run down from what I know.

Odyssey House is one of the leading groups in addiction and once again started by a woman. Homeless shelters, women again. The list just goes on because women are made better for this kind of work. Caring for the elderly, caring for the babies, caring for pregnant women and new mothers. I mean, it is one hell of a thing to be anti. The good women are not naive to men’s plight.

It is not just addiction places that are successful to care for fathers. Many groups use women funding to make buildings and programs. Anything that men can come under is taken advantage of. Like a parent’s program and shelter.

But men alone and without children are the ones that lack the support. Women who are in charge of funding have to hit business to get men cared for but business is out for credibility and a pat on the back as social carers.

Male issues just don’t look so important as victims. Except for minority groups. They get funding regardless of man or woman. We have men’s shelters for DV in minority groups. It is just not open to the public to scrutinise. Also these groups will take white men. Everyone is working around the funding policies.

In other words, it is men’s groups that have to work the system. Work the media and work the business sector.

Fatherlessness and fathers with children is something that anyone can make huge progress on. And you yourself go for a child’s right. How much does that have favour in our system of things?

Just in case I have not answered your question right I will talk from a feminist point of view on DV.

Here goes….

When women bring out statistics to use in the community others in research have a right to protest against their work. Sometimes it takes years to get the research out of the University and into the political arena where it can be funded and then into the community where it can be implemented.

So before it gets to the community much fight has gone on.

But down here on the ground they express their views. Feminists say that they have only been using their ideas for 20 years and they feel they deserve the chance to get it right.

It is like Bush’s administration saying, “We know we made mistakes in the war but we have learnt from them and we will make better decisions”.

BTW, I got the women in our area who made the biggest feminist research in the country taken out of the council where she was implementing her work. She now works giving out funding for a bank.

I complained about every little detail I could find and even threatened to take the council to court through the Human Rights commission. We don’t need this crap. We have the worst DV record in the country. Now I go after the feminist leader for family violence in the police force for saying, “Men have a refuge. The pub”.

I am not the only one. The biggest profile case in the country for DV has feminist cop workers threatening the man on taped phone calls.

julie, it’s absolutely about funding. maybe in substance abuse it’s equal, but not in domestic violence. now I’m curious… since they have tons of substance abuse programs where women bring their children, do they have any for fathers where kids can stay?

I don’t have a clue who you are Mr. Gay but you sure do not have a clue about fathers who have been marginalized by a legal system as much to do with Republicans as Democrats. You should be writing on a feminist site not this one or is the name Mens News Daily misleading to men.

It is almost like many groups are afraid to speak out but then I wonder how many fathers groups start and close because of other reasons.

Trusts and such start up just as companies and as many as companies close so do trusts. But there are many men’s groups starting now and have been for some time. I am sure it is all coming together.

I have gained a lot from the articles and comments here.

I think some of my own personal beliefs are going to conflict with the bigger issues of the men’s movements and I only really wanted some smaller answers.

So I’ll leave this site the wonderful way it is for now and just say thanx to all and keep up the good work.

Thanx for your time Roger.

It is my view that government involvement and support for the feminist agenda is all about money. They provided an excuse for spending with a lot of money going out into private hands and to the states. This is the most corrupt kind of pork-barreling.

I agree with you that the general population is sick and tired of extreme feminism. They kind of ignored the feminist debate even back when laws were being passed – thinking it was too stupid to matter. Legal reforms only got public support when a conservative political spin was used to sell them – claiming they would reduce welfare dependency and such, and by lying about the details.

Over the past decade, the government has said they support fathers’ involvement in children’s lives on many occassions and even claimed to provide some funding for that objective. But the money always goes to existing anti-father programs. Someone just puts some very twisted spin on the explanation about why it’s going there and what they expect the effect to be.

Well, not sure we want to start a knock-down drag-out political debate – but speaking as an old guy who’s seen it all by now – the Democrats aren’t for the little guy. That’s just sales talk. Their support for extreme feminism is for pork-barreling and demonstrates how ruthless they are toward regular people when stealing the treasury and the people. They’re maffia.

And I wonder how much focus will go on fatherlessness?

I think that community groups are getting sick of feminists and as more male groups start making better ground the focus is shifting.

The policies are hard to change and you might just find there is quite a number of groups working their own methods that are under feminist ideology behind the scenes. There is quite a number of feminists in hospitals with pregnant women on drugs and there is quite a number finding that women’s anger has to be dealt with for the children’s sakes.

Nothing is what it seems out there from what I see and the only ones really holding it back are the political feminists. But then sometimes I wonder if all this is about funding and that there is fear the funding will be cut for many groups once women’s issues become gender issues or null.

If you ever get the chance to speak with those who collect funding for addiction you will surprisingly find that they receive funding for men under the women’s funding umbrella.

Consistent with the article – keeping in mind that the DNC has had a man-hating plank in their platform for the past two decades, that Obama / Biden_VAWA have promised to increase funding for anti-father federal programs – how does Baldwin’s support for the Democratic Party – mixing the identity of cheated dad with support for the party – end up helping men? That’s just misleading, don’t you think?