No, they wouldn't get to be Government advisors. Ann Widdicombe was an MP and din't make a jot of difference. Boris is the Mayor of London and isn't making a difference.

No, you have to be a Feminist to advise the Government, like the woman refered to in the article who was a defendant in the Angry Brigade trial. She is the chosen one, not Erin. Why do you think that is?

The rest of us want the Governments to GO.

Personally, I would like to see them go via an upstairs window.

Indeed percy. They need to listen to the fathers!!

I dont get the MRM love of ann widecombe, cant they see that she is a statist misandrist busybody spinster with as much grounding in the real world we have to deal with as a helium filled balloon?

Widdecombe isn't any sort of genius but she's about the only person in Parliament who stands up for men on a regular basis.

To be fair due the current state of our society male politicians are too scared to criticise to stand up for men's rights as it would basically mean an end to their careers if they told the truth and actually condemned sexism such as All Women shortlists. So you can't really blame them too much for skeeping quiet.

Only female politicans can actually get away with standing up for men without it damaging their careers, and the only one really willing to do so regularly is Widdecombe.

i remember a speech a while back where she outlined all sorts of discrimination faced by men and how the government shouldn't be adding even more etc.

I don't think i've evern heard another politican use the terms discrimination and men in the same sentence, at least not in the context of men being the victims. A man woudln't have got away with the speech.

Of course she doesn't do nearly enough, but she's one of the best of a bad bunch, at least on MRA issues if nothing else.

I saw her on TV laying into a bloke who had lots of kids and did not work, while completely ignoring the female aspect of it, and the fact that it was the women who got the finance and had the choices..

Misandrist.

Come on haahoo; are you sure you want to put her down? She comes across as the most outspoken MP against family court bias. In that sense I see her as on our side and probably the best ally we have in parliament. Only as a fantasy can I imagine an MP who is as convicted and knowledgeable as we are on the evils of feminism.

Widdecombe may appear as a bit of a fruit cake who isn’t in touch with what’s on the ground, but maybe that’s why she’ll so openly criticise the family court bollocks. She’s not like other politicians who are so in to spinning crap, and it’s obvious that she doesn’t care that much about public opinion. She says what she thinks which is so rare in politics these days.

When I think about it, only that type of a politician is going to speak against the femimassive that the majority of people are. She may not be a perfect anti-feminist by your standards, or even mine, but as far as the family courts are concerned, she’s the best we have in parliament.

It’s only practical to back her haahoo, cos with family court issues, she backs us.

Quote from Trauma Fried Brains

Come on haahoo; are you sure you want to put her down? She comes across as the most outspoken MP against family court bias. In that sense I see her as on our side and probably the best ally we have in parliament. Only as a fantasy can I imagine an MP who is as convicted and knowledgeable as we are on the evils of feminism.

Widdecombe may appear as a bit of a fruit cake who isn’t in touch with what’s on the ground, but maybe that’s why she’ll so openly criticise the family court bollocks. She’s not like other politicians who are so in to spinning crap, and it’s obvious that she doesn’t care that much about public opinion. She says what she thinks which is so rare in politics these days.

When I think about it, only that type of a politician is going to speak against the femimassive that the majority of people are. She may not be a perfect anti-feminist by your standards, or even mine, but as far as the family courts are concerned, she’s the best we have in parliament.

It’s only practical to back her haahoo, cos with family court issues, she backs us.

I am not aware of her backing of the mens positions on the family courts?

I would need to see evidence of what her position in the issues is..

From my experience, the statists positions dont offer much that really gets me excited regards family court type matters..

Some folk describe the statist/equalist position on the family issues as "half a loaf is better than none"..

Id describe it as "half a loaf for the price of two!"..

I can’t find anything specific on Google but I remember seeing her a couple of times on TV speaking out against family court bias and lack of contact order enforcement. So I guess that wont impress you because I can’t prove it. But here’s something, which think you may have seen, from the homepage of ‘New F4J’. I checked to see if its text comes up on Google and it doesn’t.

Anne Widdecombe

10 Sept 2008

"What does surprise me is that, despite both leaders of the main parties having young families and clearly being adoring dads, neither is prepared to get to grips with this dreadful state of affairs.

Just what will it take to stir their sympathy into action?More stunts?More suicides?

Sadly, there are just no votes in men's rights, only apparently in women's"

The thing is I get the impression from you that unless a politician is totally with us then they’re not good enough. While I think that’s not going to happen with any politician yet. But it’s still worthwhile to try and gain the support of any politician who speaks out and is with us to some extent.
Her quotes above are probably the best we can get for now. I know it’s a long way from what we really want, but it’s the best there is compared to the other pussy politicians.

Quote from Trauma Fried Brains

I can’t find anything specific on Google but I remember seeing her a couple of times on TV speaking out against family court bias and lack of contact order enforcement. So I guess that wont impress you because I can’t prove it. But here’s something, which think you may have seen, from the homepage of ‘New F4J’. I checked to see if its text comes up on Google and it doesn’t.

Anne Widdecombe

10 Sept 2008

"What does surprise me is that, despite both leaders of the main parties having young families and clearly being adoring dads, neither is prepared to get to grips with this dreadful state of affairs.

Just what will it take to stir their sympathy into action?More stunts?More suicides?

Sadly, there are just no votes in men's rights, only apparently in women's"

The thing is I get the impression from you that unless a politician is totally with us then they’re not good enough. While I think that’s not going to happen with any politician yet. But it’s still worthwhile to try and gain the support of any politician who speaks out and is with us to some extent.
Her quotes above are probably the best we can get for now. I know it’s a long way from what we really want, but it’s the best there is compared to the other pussy politicians.

Sure, my cynicism is often misinterpreted as a refusal to consider the merits of folk who are not fully "of like mind", but that is far from the case..

I can also see the merits in some folk, even feminists, even the dreaded Greer beast, when they make useful statements, even though most of what they say is bilge..

A problem with the "moderate" mrm (which is ALL organised groups in the movement) is that they "cherry pick" from a variety of trees, they pick from the conservative tree, the socialist tree, the religious tree, so many different fruits..

However, this approach is "not properly joined up" and sometimes taking fruit from just one tree would be workable, but, they "dont want to take the rough with the smooth"..

However, in real life, one finds that a new "rough" appears to raise its head that most folk cant predict when you take the "cherry picking approach"..

Widecombe does that.. Its one of the features of conservatism to be "pragmatic", which is why Tories seem to piss down both trouser legs at the same time..

Here is an example of widecombes approach.. Classic tory..

DADS SHOULDN'T NEED STUNTS TO GET JUSTICE





ACCESS DENIED: Fathers 4 Justice highlight their cause with a protest on Harriet Harman



Wednesday June 11,2008


By Ann Widdecombe



TWO members of Fathers 4 Justice climb on to Harriet Harman’s roof.

I suppose I must say that they should not do so; that the police time involved is a waste; that the deputy Labour leader has a right to live unmolested in her own home; that damage may be caused, which would certainly be criminal.

OK, all of that is true but it is also true that, without these occasional demonstrations, the plight of fathers separated from their children would be even more comprehensively ignored.

(Its ok to badger someone in their private home, as long as they are socialist!!)

In their time, Fathers 4 Justice have done some pretty irresponsible things, such as throwing powder at the then Prime Minister and causing, for the first time, the public to be separated from Parliament by a large screen.

(Right, so respect for the state is more important than raising awareness?)

One Easter, I had to persuade a pair of them to leave the roof of Westminster Abbey so that worshippers could get on with their solemn Good Friday service.


(ditto regarding respect for a church that has turned a blind eye to the plight of fathers?)


How many more roofs must be occupied before government listens?





Yet, without their antics, their cause would continue to be unrec­ognised and it is a very considerable cause. Some dads just disappear, others refuse to pay maintenance, others still turn up only on high days and holidays.

Theirs is not the cause to which I am referring
(Right, so a good dad pays maintenance and does what the mother expects? Is there even a shred of interest in WHY many fathers "dissappear"? Course not, why even consider it! This is the classic tory "deadbeat" shaming that has to mentioned as a prelude to anything that may be positive towards dads.. First thing, just ensure that you make the public aware that NOT ALL DADS ARE GOOD DADS!) The tories brought in the hated CSA act.. That was a major start to the rapid divorce increase and perverse incentives of the state!

but to that of thousands of fathers who married expecting to be involved in their children’s lives; to see, hear and smell those children on a daily basis; to know what they were doing; to counsel and guide – in short, just to be dad.

Instead, their marriages break up and their ex-wives, either immediately or over time, decide they don’t want them to be involved with the children.


SEARCH COLUMNISTS for:





At best, the men are turned from daily dad into fortnightly visitor; at worst, the women resort to endless stratagems to stop contact altogether, sometimes moving to the other end of the country; sometimes by making false allegations of abuse or neglect. Then there are the grandparents whose sons are the victims of such malice and who, as a consequence, also lose contact.

When my book Father Figure, a novel dealing with this plight, was published, it was not only deprived fathers but deprived grandparents who wrote to me to say how much they valued someone actually recognising their misery.

The law must recognise it, too. Before the last election, two members of Fathers 4 Justice, dressed as Robin and Batman, shinned up Buckingham Palace.

Yes, it was daft because they could easily have been shot but at least it turned the pressure on both major political parties to promise changes to the law to control ex-wives who were deliberately frustrating access agreements laid down by courts. Three years later, these men are still resorting to the same kind of colourful, dangerous tactics. How many more roofs must be occupied before government listens?

What will it take for Harriet Harman, who has benefited from a long-lasting marriage and the involvement of her husband in their children’s lives throughout, to take pity on those unfairly denied access to their own children?

In my childhood, the only man on the roof was Father Christmas as he prepared to come down the chimney. Older children told me he did not really exist.

Today, many children must be wondering if their fathers really exist and many men must be wondering whether it is worth going to see Santa in his grotto to ask for an access visit.

It could hardly be less effective than asking the courts.

Whats her answer though?

It is not given..

I Guess she would allow dads who pay the state child tax access to their kids?

I dont know.. Who does?

So good I said it twice http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/96472

Feel free to air your views here;
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=fo24532
do the right thing here;
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/please-go/#detail
just to remindyou what it is all for!!
[nomedia]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZDBOH2Hdz8"][COLOR=#810081]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZDBOH2Hdz8[/COLO[/nomedia]