LESSONS FOR THE CAMPAIGN FOR MALE EQUALITY FROM THE SHARED PARENTING CAMPAIGN

So it has now become officialthat the government has rejected not only Norgrove's opposition to the concept of shared parenting but also the wrong headed rejection of it by the previous governments (Conservative and Labour) and the establishment (especially Cafcass and the judiciary).

This also includes those groups such as the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, the government's Equalities Department and other like minded groups (Fawcett Society anyone?) who proclaim they are in favour of equality while purposely turning a blind eye to the fact that children were (overwhelmingly) not being able to share their lives with their fathers.

The Equalities and Human Rights Commission's stance has been particularly sickening because it is clear there has been for decades a clear form of sexual discrimination against fathers in operation not only in the way the judiciary and Cafcass operate but also in the way that many mothers have been allowed to willfully break the law by ignoring court orders (even Ken Clarke on Radio 4's Today Programme on Monday morning bemoaned the fact that mothers broke court orders without any consequence and therefore were undermining the rule of law). Remember, if this was happening with the genders being reversed the Commission would be banging the drum every day. Their silence has been shameful and shows their antipathy towards men.

Until the ink is dry, the legislative statement in place and the judges acting upon it then we can not count our chickens.

However, it is worth reflecting on how the campaign was won.

Firstly, you do need a government that is willing to listen and is not ideologically driven to hate men (the previous government supported ideologically the view that men should not be part of the children's lives). While there is an anti-male element in the coalition government, overall there was a will to deal with this problem because of the family centred views of the two parties that form the coalition. It helps with a cadre of MP's who have had men turning up to their surgeries for years and not being to help. A new cadre of MP's suddenly facing this issue will also have helped.

Secondly, there was a pincer movement of more radical groups who worked outside the tent such as F4J and RF4J who brought the problem to the attention of every member of public and then other groups such as Families Need Fathers, Fatherhood Institute, Grandparents' Apart and Grandparents' Association amongst others who worked within the tent. This pincer and combination of groups broadly making the same arguments in different ways ceaselessly for years and years on end helped to create the framework for this week's result.

In terms of what lesson there can be learned for the future of male equality, dealing with injustice against men and men's issues in general, a few pointers could be made:

(1) The need to never give up - the campaign at all levels went through peaks and troughs but never ended and the campaign for equality for men must never end.

(2) The need for black swans/outliers, and wanting to be outside the tent is always vital. They help lay the ground and open the door for the mainstream. Here, despite the years of great work by FnF and others, if F4J had not brought the problem to the public fore, the impetus for change and the spotlight being shone on the subject in the way it did would never have happened. While this has been such a crucial and fundamental issue, Tom Martin's campaign against the LSE is another example of how the door can be opened and every year there are others (Mirko Fischer vs British Airways) who can make this happen.

(3) While (2) is vital, there also needs to be mainstream groups within the tent trying to influence public policy to ensure the government and others who are naturally conservative with a small 'c' have people they fell they can work with without controversy.

(4)  The need to be firm, consistent, fighting the corner on our terms but doing it in the right tone is also vital. While (3) outlines the need for mainstream groups being in the tent, there is no point being in the tent if it means sacrificing your core aims. This is why the consistency and the firmness of groups within the tent has been important because, especially under the last government, it would have been too easy to have become suckered into the status quo. But groups like FNF stuck to their guns.

A number of other groups working in other fields such as the Men's Network, ManKind Initiative, Abused Men in Scotland, Prostate Cancer Society and others are vital because while they are in the tent and are part of the mainstream they are not losing their message. And on many occasions they are verr firm in what they believe in but the tone is right. This has to be the template going forward.

(5) Turning the equalities and fairness rhetoric against those who abuse it. The last point is to remember often discrimination against men and/or the omission of men, is undertaken in the 'spirit' of fairness and equality. One lesson from this week's announcement has been the way the messaging has been about the unfairness and inequality that children have in not being able to have a relationship with both parents. How could those who believe in those things continue to deny the rights of children in this way.

This (5) has been a powerful tool especially used by some of the groups mentioned in (4) and others in demanding why the women's movement proclaims it is is favour of equality when in practice that equality does not apply to people who happen to be men.

There may be other lessons to be learned but at least this week there is a glimmer of hope for those children wanting to have a meaningful relationship with their fathers and their grandparents who have been denied it so far because of the legal system and their mothers.

Posted by Skimmington 

Comments

[Dave]

I heard the Ken Clarke interview on Radio 4. I was egging him on to say something like..."And we mustn't forget the rights of Fathers out there, the vast majority of whom, like the child's Mother, should have exactly the same entitlement regarding parenting. Don't forget that we need to be thinking about the rights of the child AND the Father here, both of whom are losing out at present in favour of support for Mothers". But, no, we're still not there yet are we! Because Ken, like most men in high profile public positions, are still far too scared to speak like that. Instead, they feel they still need to divert the attention using sneaky verbal tactics that won't get them into trouble! Now, I FULLY agree that children come first, no disputing that one, it's a given. But, men are not going to get proper equality while they pussyfoot around. Let's hear someone with some honesty. Let's hear someone speak the truth. Let's hear someone say out loud in a nice clear voice that men are an extremely supportive and necessary asset to families, work God-damned hard and deserve 50% of everything they contribute towards including their own children!!! Sorry, but I just happen to pick up on things like this!

[Bob]

Some points are already slightly worrying such as;

"We will consider very carefully how legislation can be framed to ensure that a meaningful relationship is not about equal division of time, but the quality of parenting received by the child."

That one is a possible primer for manipulation. Though its more difficult to try to change the whole thing in one sitting. There is plenty of very positive progress here.

The legislative is however still infested with feminists and there is a very long way to go before that is rectified. I think ultimately the media will be the key area, once the mechanisms of the propaganda machine are dismantled it'll be much easier to have a truely fair debate.

[Dave]

You're right, Bob, the rate of progress will be down to the media. And it would be even quicker if someone in power would speak out without pussyfooting! Then we might have a chance of grabbing the attention of the younger generation.

[John Kimble]

Good article it's always useful to reflect on our achievements and how battles have been won (or lost).

The only people you've missed out is online activists and bloggers. The impact of someone ripping apart the lies of the latest Guardian feminist bigot really is very powerful if done with honesty and accuracy and without being too disrespectful.

[Mike Buchanan]

I think it's worth mentoning that legislation is one thing, how that legislation is put into practise is another. In 'The Woman Racket' Steve Moxon points out how some femily-related legislation was utterly compromised by guidance notes issues by the related government department. Officials at the 'sharp end' use these guidance notes to steer their approaches (as we'd expect), not the actual legislation. I'd expect the various fathers' groups to keep an eye out for this.

Mike Buchanan

[CitizenJay]

Well it's good to see some progress, but the men's rights movement still seems to be punching well below its weight at the moment.

The sense of injustice regarding the way male citizens are treated is strong enough - how could it not be?

But what is required, now, in my opinion, is some minor tweaks to the infrastructure for internet campaigning, so that the force of public sentiment can be truly marshalled.

For example, I was very impressed recently by an American site called 'A Voice For Men', which allows sympathisers to donate money towards the campaign directly and immediately via PayPal.

That's a great idea, because it can then create a virtuous circle whereby extra money makes for better awareness, and hence more money, etc.

If we could really start channelling momentum in that way, I think we could really on to something.

Just look to the 'Arab Spring' for hope - the physical infrastructure of the internet had been there for some time before it really took off. When it finally did, ordinary citizens were able to challenge state media organisations and the government directly,
causing great political upheaval.

That's the kind of thing the men's rights movement in the UK can successfully emulate IMO

[Amfortas]

An excellent round up of a working strategy. Different 'formations' do different actions in ways that suit their skill and drive. ALL contribute, even those outside the tent. (as long as they are not pissing in through the flaps.)

[MW]

I don't know very much about policies and government moves etc
I'm a father who came home from work to find his new born baby was gone I've been to hell and am having to see my now five month old baby son in a contact centre in Northern Ireland
It feels like what i would imagine a prison visit would be like
I've talked to other fathers visiting their children in this way and can only come to one conclusion . Women have total control over a child and even in cases like mine where the mother is a drinker and drug user with violent tendancies and obvious mental issues nothing is done to help the father or for that mater the child.
How can we stop this madness ?
I don't drink or do drugs of any kind I've no history of violence or abuse of any sort all I want is to play a meaningful role in my child's life and I'm denied this from day one !!!!
I feel that the system is to easily abused by mothers and contact centres are full of men who only want what I want.
It's a well known fact that women can have serious depression before and after giving birth
And that hormones have caused women to attack not only men but children to.