After the Colston four, the Gill one?

[Rusty Nails]

That's a relief, anyhow - I don't know what J4M is so I assume you mean F4J?

Oops. It's a new group I'm forming.... Just For Me.

 

[Ian H]

That's a relief, anyhow - I don't know what J4M is so I assume you mean F4J?

Gargling on the interwwwebs I found Fathers 4 Justice, who seem to be the weird cosplay super-hero types; Justice for Men, an unpleasant FB group; and Justice for Men & Boys, a political party with exceedingly unpleasant policies.

 

[mudsticks]

Gargling on the interwwwebs I found Fathers 4 Justice, who seem to be the weird cosplay super-hero types; Justice for Men, an unpleasant FB group; and Justice for Men & Boys, a political party with exceedingly unpleasant policies.

Oops. It's a new group I'm forming.... Just For Me.

Let's hope so ...

 

[theclaud]

Gargling on the interwwwebs I found Fathers 4 Justice, who seem to be the weird cosplay super-hero types; Justice for Men, an unpleasant FB group; and Justice for Men & Boys, a political party with exceedingly unpleasant policies.

Interestificating! Thanks.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Let's hope so ...

It's Just For Me because nobody else would join.

 

[mudsticks]

It's Just For Me because nobody else would join.

Awwww ..

If only there was a tiny violin emojii

 

[BoldonLad]

My issue was with the use of the words in bold in your first post.
I agree that there is an over-strong element of in the Fathers4Justice group that are bitter about the circumstances surrounding their own particular cases, rather than any real fight for justice or fairness, and many of them are idiots who do themselves no good with some of their tactics, but to say that the "main aim" of the organisation is preventing women getting their children away from "men like Gill" is not true, and a pointed accusation that more deserves use of the word "schtick". Unless, of course, you can prove to me most cases of denying access are based upon physical or sexual abuse of children, in which case I readily accept your point.

There is probably a valid debate to be had about whether they believe they are fighting for their inalienable right of access or against what they see as women's inalienable right to deny access. I am happy to see the individual cases dealt with via the legal system based on their merits, primarily the best interests of the child, and if any of those fathers is guilty of abuse I have no issues with them losing access.

Speaking as someone who has experienced this, (the bolded part), I would agree, with the bolded part.

 

[BoldonLad]

Aiui in the majority of cases that come before the court both parents are granted access, by the courts if it's considered to be safe for / in the interest of the child / children.

This, of course, is totally true, but..... it is very difficult to actually enforce, if faced with a devious and intransigent partner.

 

[mudsticks]

This, of course, is totally true, but..... it is very difficult to actually enforce, if faced with a devious and intransigent partner.

Yes, so I often read, and have occasionally witnessed first hand .

I really think there should somehow, be more coverage of good parenting and healthy relationships in schools or wherever.

It seems to be left up to hope, or wishful thinking that good examples will all be magically absorbed throughout kidhood.

But as we all too tragically discover, very unhealthy ideas are often transmitted, and absorbed down the generations,

 

[BoldonLad]

Yes, so I often read, and have occasionally witnessed first hand .

I really think there should somehow, be more coverage of good parenting and healthy relationships in schools or wherever.

It seems to be left up to hope, or wishful thinking that good examples will all be magically absorbed throughout kidhood.

But as we all too tragically discover, very unhealthy ideas are often transmitted, and absorbed down the generations,

Very interesting... and, the relevance to a parent unreasonably separated from their children, now, is?

 

[mudsticks]

Very interesting... and, the relevance to a parent unreasonably separated from their children, now, is?

That's less likely to happen, in the first instance, if the ideas of good parenting - that parenting most beneficial to the children are agreed, and acted upon, from the get go.

Retrofitting such ideas, will of course be harder, but isn't impossible in all cases, I'm sure.

 

[theclaud]

If I may drag the thread back from Bolders' personal anecdotes to the bloke who attacked the sculpture...

His ex has alleged domestic abuse, and he's been convicted of harassing and threatening his former landlady. He kidnapped her dog and threatened to kill it, left threatening 20-minute long voicemail messages, sent her an email calling her a 'fat lesbian alcoholic' and left abusive reviews on Spare room. He appears to be am anti-vaxer and 'plandemic' conspiracy theorist, and thinks the BBC are 'paedo c**ts'. The message he wrote on the sculpture was 'noose all peados [sic]'.

 

[mudsticks]

If I may drag the thread back from Bolders' personal anecdotes to the bloke who attacked the sculpture...

His ex has alleged domestic abuse, and he's been convicted of harassing and threatening his former landlady. He kidnapped her dog and threatened to kill it, left threatening 20-minute long voicemail messages, sent her an email calling her a 'fat lesbian alcoholic' and left abusive reviews on Spare room. He appears to be am anti-vaxer and 'plandemic' conspiracy theorist, and thinks the BBC are 'paedo c**ts'. The message he wrote on the sculpture was 'noose all peados [sic]'.

Yebbut , I expect she / the dog was asking for it right ??

 

[winjim]

If I may drag the thread back from Bolders' personal anecdotes to the bloke who attacked the sculpture...

His ex has alleged domestic abuse, and he's been convicted of harassing and threatening his former landlady. He kidnapped her dog and threatened to kill it, left threatening 20-minute long voicemail messages, sent her an email calling her a 'fat lesbian alcoholic' and left abusive reviews on Spare room. He appears to be am anti-vaxer and 'plandemic' conspiracy theorist, and thinks the BBC are 'paedo c**ts'. The message he wrote on the sculpture was 'noose all peados [sic]'.

This whole situation is even more nuanced than I first thought.

 

[Ian H]

This whole situation is even more nuanced than I first thought.

"According to Tim Cole of the University of Bristol, the Colston statue was proposed as a response to the nearby erection of another statue in Bristol, depicting Edmund Burke, who had been critical of the city's involvement in the slave trade."

"The Colston monument has, likewise, always been political. Cole told me that the statue was put up in 1895—some 174 years after Colston’s death—in response to another statue. That one celebrated the politician and philosopher Edmund Burke, a conservative who disapproved of Britain’s high-handed attitude toward its colonies.

"Those agitating for a Colston memorial wanted it to stand within what Cole calls “statue spitting distance” of Burke, who had been critical of the city’s slave trade. Burke had also argued for fair taxation, while Bristol’s 19th-century merchants championed trickle-down economics, which, according to Cole, “says that actually the way wealth is redistributed in society is through acts of philanthropy.” Colston, who endowed schools, hospitals, almshouses, and other institutions, was therefore the merchants’ hero. His statue was funded not by the taxes of a grateful populace but by private, and largely anonymous, donors. In other words, it was an eight-foot-tall bronze middle finger to Burke’s admirers. It was the product of a culture war from the start."
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/08/bristol-colston-statue-culture-war-history/619671/