Agreed.

So Alec Baldwin is bringing this down to a personal level – the battle between parents – and defending his own image as a good guy who got a raw deal who doesn’t deserve to be cast as an abusive father.

I can understand that could feel good to hear someone else say it – to get some recognition that other fathers go through the same kinds of things. But except for that little emotional fun for a few minutes, how does it help fathers? Maybe a little awareness – but once again – misdirected.

There’s a minor hope that there’s a bridge in Baldwin’s book – re: the family court machine. The words are reminiscent of Stephen Baskerville’s account. But does Baldwin’s book explain what that is accurately, as Baskerville did – or create a new less informed definition that will cause confusion in the public mind?

People have spent years working to get the truth out. Is Baldwin helping or cutting the worthwhile efforts off at the pass? There is no way that I can see to reconcile his support for the Democratic Party – which has carried an anti-father plank in its platform for the past two decades and now promises to restore / fully fund all anti-father programs etc. I don’t therefore see how he can get into the truth about why fathers are hurting so much now.

Keep up the cause and my greatest respect to you all who are involved in fathers rights and undoing the wrongs of a legal system infested with Feminists.

Thank you Teri for your hard work, and updating us. Obviously, the above should have said, “brave fathers, men, women, and even children.” My prayers are with the two protestors.

The mass media silence of ongoing events, conducted by brave fathers in Ohio, is deafening!

Yes, mass media rarely mentions the war against fathers. Even follow up (re-edited) videos of Baldwin’s ABC 20/20 interview talk mostly about his feelings about suicide and “the infamous phone call.” Most have removed a lot of the mention about Parental Alienation and Parental Alienation Syndrome, or slanted the editing to downplay it. The politics you mention appears to control our mass media as well as family law.

It did feel good to see ABC, 20/20’s 18 minute segment include Baldwin saying he knows there are other fathers out there who are victims of PAS. That was followed by video of “the truck” advocating “Equal Parenting Now.” National Coalition of Free Men, Los Angeles (NCFMLA) could be seen on the tailgate.
http://tinyurl.com/3o2hqy

Here in Los Angeles we are working hard to publicize the need for Equal Parenting, and tell how P.A. and PAS harms us all.

Despite the villifying gender feminist opposition, brave fathers and men are working hard to present facts that the mass media doesn’t address and society is generally ignorant of.

The perception starts with the fact that people aren’t aware that family law decisions are now politically controlled. It’s so basic that fr advocates seem to think it’s not worth mentioning. But it hasn’t been explained on television or in print newspapers across the country. About the only place I see it is in a few articles at MND. How would people know if nobody tells them?

Often, in the case of many fathers, there are even decisions from judges in multiple states, when mom decides to move away with the child. What remains consistent, state to state, is that fathers and men have no rights where moms and women have no accountability in the same areas.

The “silly” perceptions of the general public are formed by them spending too much time immersed in America’s misandrist, gender feminized mass media.

With billions in dollars for gender feminist brainwashing of judges, prosecutors, cops and lawyers (through STOP grants funded by VAWA), the demonization of fathers and men has taken on Stalinist proportions. There’s nothing “silly” about that, IMO.

There’s no information even in the press release that explains why the protest is politically relevant. Americans are led to believe that this is a protest regarding only individual cases. Supporters honk and perhaps hope these two guys catch a break in their own personal situations, but then drive on none the wiser.

A member of the general public responds in another forum:

Silly.
The case is in Illinois.
The father is from California.
So he climbs a crane in Ohio?
What judge is going to believe this guy?

It will be interesting to see if the Sunday morning papers, or Monday morning papers, say anything about this F4JUS protest. Most of the news the past few days has been about the upcoming presidental election.

I ran a Google search on key words, then hit “news.” So far no coverage comes up except for MND and one other blog.

When protesters explain that the problem is family court, many Americans will refer to old knowledge and general theory about how the American system is supposed to work. It then becomes to them an individual’s problem. In the system defined by our Constitution, courts are supposed to be separate and to a great extent independent from the other branches – independent of politics. So, what then are the people hearing the protest supposed to do in response to it? They aren’t lawyers involved in those cases. Their conclusion would naturally be that there’s nothing they can do other than honk in support.

People need to understand that family law is now completely politically controlled for the protests to matter politically.

I’d like to know if the Ohio protest has gotten any mainstream media coverage. Generally, I think there’s a difference between the US and places like England. I said in another thread that I admire the fuller and more representative discussion that goes on in England and other places. F4J got a lot of media converage every time they did something. My expectation is that the media in the US would ignore the protest.

This is a wonderful thing to happen.

I guess it can’t be helped because this war is decades old but is not one child important? And here we have 2.

I know that it is impossible to ask all men’s groups to care for men before they care to destroy other isms but are we not headed down a road of information?

Are not our countries already having one speaker/group represent each group?

Is there not a way to keep each individual case away from the big picture? it sure would help with funding even from companies and individuals.

NZ has the same dilemma. Either take on the whole MRM or nothing. How many have already walked away choosing nothing and just getting on with life.

These are fathers and I hope the can change one thing. The future of their families.

It is a shame that the F4J effort in the UK is goingthrough a problem period with ‘personalities’ getting in the way of task/action but Canada especially has taken up the running.

This effort by Don is especially heartening when one considers the divided opinion in the USA MRM after the Lincoln Memorial success. I was staggered by the (dare I say it ?) total-courage-failure attitudes of some people. (There. Restraint for you).

Many of the 100,000 spectators will have got the message.