Interesting post, comrade.

I go along with a lot of it, but while I detest nasty feminist stuff, like the way judges make almost invariably sexist rulings in custody cases in the West, and infantile feminism, such as churlish responses to chivalrous gestures like holding doors open etc., I have to say that Islam's sexism is abhorrent, e.g. their iniquitous inheritance laws and their insistence on making women dress wierdly without similar restrictions on us guys, and the obscenity of polygamy without polyandry, and pedophilia, as affirmed by the Saudi Grand Mufti

Until decent Muslims clean up their own mess, the two civilisations (or what's left of ours), will continue to spiral into conflict.

Well, Brother, my concern was with the 'absent fathers' – who are rarely absent by choice.

I am not in agreement with his views on the wars against barbarism, nor am I one of these abortion agitators (for or against)

BUT

I know guys in the UK and Canada who have suffered injustice. Families Without Fathers is or was the UK campaign group, and Canada's got a similar group. Courts in those countries almost invariably give custody to mothers in divorce cases, and one government officer told me that a woman would 'have to be insane or a drug addict' not to get custody. 'Mrs. Doubtfire' showed a similar sexist bias in America, which is what the guy is presumably referring to..

Mothers can and do flout access rules with impunity, since no matter how often dads were thwarted in their quest to enjoy their court-ordered access to their kids, no court would jail the spiteful women.

I knew men driven to despair, and read of others driven to suicide, by the sexist system.

When the Child Support Agency was set up – such a disaster it has now been replaced, I believe – to hunt for fathers who saw no reason to subsidise their exes (a sum for that purpose was inexplicably inlcuded in what the dads had to stump up) one father went to court to retrieve the moneys he'd already paid in excess of what was deemed fair. He was spurned. Heads she wins, tails he loses.

You can check the websites of the various campaign groups.

A lot of these feminazi groups are subsidised from public funds. it's a disgrace.

Well, Brother, my concern was with the 'absent fathers' – who are rarely absent by choice.

Seriously? Rarely absent by choice? I strongly disagree and I suspect that the data would back me up on this. Are you honestly saying that it is more common for women to abandon the family/marriage than men?

These equality laws and agencies have been formed because the previous order of things was unfairly biased in favor of the bread winning men.

OK, they don't always work perfectly, but surely these imperfect systems are better than reverting to a world where women were afraid to leave bad husbands because their financial security and their children's future depended on the man. Where a woman abandoned by her man had no options.

fathers who saw no reason to subsidise their exes (a sum for that purpose was inexplicably inlcuded in what the dads had to stump up

I don't see it as all that inexplicable actually. A woman who has sacrificed her career to bear and raise children and whose marriage then ends is entitled not to live in poverty for the rest of her life.

Regardless of these "Feminazi" (!) laws, divorced women and their children are still far more likely to live in poverty than their ex-husbands, regardless of who initiated the divorce. Does that sound fair to you?

As suggested above, study their plight before rushing to judgement.

Like I said, Ross. I don't deny that there are horror stories out there and that the agencies set up to guarantee women's rights are not always perfect. 

But I still firmly believe that the world is a better place thanks to the introduction of laws that protect women and offer them more financial security after a breakup. Better for women and children – perhaps worse for a percentage of men. 

A few years in Indonesia, where the power normally lies with the bread-winning husband, has shown me just how unfair things could be. How many Indonesian lasses do you know who have been deserted with kids by a deadbeat husband? I know plenty. If only there were an agency that could track these men down and make them pay a fair percentage of their income for the support of the families they have abandoned… 

They tried the Child Support Agency in Britain and it eventually had to be wound up because it could not be made to work. I don't think something similar would stand a chance here although I agree it would be nice if it could.

Sure, that particular agency failed but as a general rule, the rights of women are supported and upheld by the courts and legal agencies in the UK and the US. This is the kind of support and protection that Equalist – and to a lesser extent Ross – seem to be railing against.

I know cases where the father has taken the children because the wife cannot support them and then denied access to the mother. Its a minefield.

This kind of thing is rife. If the husband isn't just running away from the family and not paying maintenance, he's using his superior financial position to keep the kids away from their mother. Of course their are mums who cut and run too but as a general rule, Indonesia should show us just how bad things would be without government intervention.

.. wow.. reading this.. and the fact that i saw so many woman young and old cry because of men.. when their husband beat them up and their children, took their saving for prostitution and gambling or drunk… a father who rape his own daughter, a husband who ask their wive to work as prostitute, a young girl who nearly killed her self because boyfriend ask her to kill their unborn baby because their not married yet, because he is to afraid of commitment (or maybe his parent to know that he can't keep his birdie on it cage?) yupp these all still available in Indonesia.

and this guy cried out that women a DICKtator ?hmmm… hmmm…

Theres plenty guys that been hurt by women, but the comparizon still not as much the opposite.

Mostly, they got hurt they went to bar with male friends, got drunk and meet new sassy girl, go back home with her, and had breakfast in bed together, thats the end of story (sorry being sarcastic.. but its just silly).

This will come to indonesia.. in about.. let see.. hundreds years after today maybe? or after indonesian know what a child support is.. or after indonesia made a fair rule for woman about divorce maybe…

Equalist said:

Women in Indonesia have more comfortable and longer lives. Men are workhorses and wallets for them. Men do most dangerous and dirtiest work.

Women control men on a daily bais with their emotions, from the first date on.  Unhappy wife can hold whole household hostage. Daily emotional terrorism. He has to please her to stop her terrorism.

And America and Europe?

In feminist countries, men are exposed to all that plus unlimited violence by women. We live in hell. Many men commit suicide after divorce, because they loose everything: children and life savings. And if she can't exploit him financially, she puts him in jail. Easily.

I doubt any Western woman comits suicide after divorce.

How we fell under feminsit dictatorship?  Because men wanted to please women; too many suckers and wimps. Like in Indonesia, judging from your posts. You will have feminist barbarians ruling you in your life time. You don't understand what it means letting women take power and starting to punish men.  And controlling police and jails. Feminists are not interested in 50:50 equality, for them equality is 100:0.

Men do most dangerous work? ever try to wear high heels and tiny mini skirt next to dark traffic light mister? thats what i call danger.

Woman these days doing most of men could do. Oil and gas Exploration, join army, go to war, become a scientist, stuntmen/women, you name it they surely could do it.

When a guy come in to a relationship there are choices, wether they want to continue it or not. So there are no such emotional terorism. You could stop it at the very beginning.

The way you talk somehow made me imagine a dominatrix relationship, when a woman enslave a man (yes with the whip and leather) hehe thats a fantasy some people have, but still even when you want to step into that kind of relationship it need both agreement.

I cant understand in which part men seemed not able to run away (like they best at) from an unhealthy relationship??? when they have secure job (better pay than women), stronger body (hey mr muscles) and a brain that could seperate between emotional and being realistic?? (women kind of mix everything).

It took a strong women like Kartini in Indonesia to let women studying, learn at school, while men, already did years years before. Why you sound like someone whos very afraid of competition in life?

Men that i know is not that weak (even a sisy guy have stronger mentality than i read here).

Sorry, jo2j, just saw your comment and have to tell you that I spent considerable time trying to help and advise guys who got the rough end of the stick over access.

Eager to please? Most of them wanted only to please their kids by sharing time with them, but that 'privilege' -which costs the vengeful wives nothing but is of priceless value to the fathers and the children – was too much to ask.

Equal access is the only fair ruling, unless one or other parent is proven to be dangerous.

I'm lucky, in that my offspring and I have an unbreakable bond. Many fathers have helplessly  to watch that bond being sundered.