A different form of sexism

clairefontaine

The Corinthian wrote: »

With regards to men's rights, it'll probably have to get a lot worse before there is any actual action taken; both by men and women who recognise that it's gone too far.

I can see that happening. We already have noises being made on things like the abolition of custodial sentences and the effective abolition of guardian rights - instead placing all rights in the hands of the custodial parent - and I suspect that there are plenty of other initiatives in the pipeline that will further marginalize and discriminate against men.

Eventually this will go too far and force the apathetic majority to actually do something, but as I already mooted, it's not going to happen for a while.

I'm sure they'll introduce that for the purposes of introducing double taxation before long.

Atlas Shrugged, Irish style.

What do you mean, abolition of custodial sentences? I cant see that happening in reality.

Abolition of guardian rights, I see that is making it akin to how it works in most of the rest of the western world where rights are tied into custody, that does not mean full custody necessarily but shared or partial. In other words, for the custodial parent to be able to make unilateral decisions, s/he has to present a full custody order- which basically means the child has no contact with the other parent at all - usually done only in very extreme circumstances or by abandonment. Even your child goes to the other parent for even one weekend a month, that makes you a shared custodian.

Its just far more practical all around for everyone. Guardianship seems to be more stuff from the land of the twilight zone, product of the "it is and it isnt" mentality.

Ireland had social reforms probably because of the EU and not because of domestic action- I could be wrong there, but that is my impression.

The Corinthian

clairefontaine wrote: »

What do you mean, abolition of custodial sentences? I cant see that happening in reality.

Why not? Dafter things have.

I wouldn't have thought ten years ago that simply living with someone for five years would automatically make you de facto married to them, as such a concept would run completely against the principle of personal freedom - yet, that now the case.

Abolition of guardian rights, I see that is making it akin to how it works in most of the rest of the western world where rights are tied into custody, that does not mean full custody necessarily but shared or partial.

Under the last government a committee was set up to explore and put forward possible reforms in the area of guardianship. What they eventually published effectively abolished guardianship, instead replacing it with a new concept know as 'parental responsibility'.

Some of this was progressive, in that it became 'automatic' (upon application) for all, including unmarried fathers. However, as part of this 'reform', all those guardian's rights associated with religious, educational and other aspects of their child's upbringing were abolished also, placing them solely in the hands of the primary custodial parent.

In practice, this would mean that for unmarried fathers, they would still need to apply for this new form of guardianship, but at least could not be opposed (outside of a challenge to the paternity), however for married fathers (and those unmarried fathers who already won guardianship) they would lose any say in key aspects of their child's upbringing.

Even your child goes to the other parent for even one weekend a month, that makes you a shared custodian.

Not sure about that. Under Irish law, I believe it's still only treated as access, but with over-nights. Of course, the above reform is moot anyway, because in practice such guardian rights are effectively ignored by the courts.

Its just far more practical all around for everyone. Guardianship seems to be more stuff from the land of the twilight zone, product of the "it is and it isnt" mentality.

Then the most practical solution is not to have any rights for the non custodial parent, by that logic.

Ireland had social reforms probably because of the EU and not because of domestic action- I could be wrong there, but that is my impression.

This was once the case, but not any more. Neither smoking ban nor the cohabitation act were a result of pressure from the EU. Ireland is way 'ahead' of the EU parliament where it comes to gender quotas or the criminalization of clients of prostitution too.

Most of these social policies are nowadays the result of domestic lobby groups that have entrenched themselves in the organs of government. Check the CV's of many of those involved in gender related initiatives and you'll typically find women's studies along the way.

clairefontaine

Geesh, they sure know how to complicate things. What the hell? I can't keep up with all that reform. FFs, how is anyone supposed to know what is going on. I seriously don't know how those families where they never fully filed for divorce and then start new families under cohabitation deal with all this.

Or how do get anything done here you need to use the circuit court in which you need a barrister and a solicitor costing people even more money.

My bet is that this is all started by lawyers so they can keep themselves in business and fancifully lubricated by money ripped from despairing and confused people in the midst of a family break up.

There needs to be a lobby group to democratise the courts and not use family law as a scam to make money for legal professionals, - that is ultimately what I am reading between the lines there.

The Corinthian

clairefontaine wrote: »

Geesh, they sure know how to complicate things. What the hell? I can't keep up with all that reform. FFs, how is anyone supposed to know what is going on. I seriously don't know how those families where they never fully filed for divorce and then start new families under cohabitation deal with all this.

Interesting legal question. I'd imagine both the spouse and new partner would have a claim on maintenance, assets and inheritance.

My bet is that this is all started by lawyers so they can keep themselves in business and fancifully lubricated by money ripped from despairing and confused people in the midst of a family break up.

While the nature of the Irish legal system, not to mention the Gardai, leaves a lot to be desired, it's ultimately the law itself that is the larger problem. You can reform the courts all you want, but if that law is prejudiced, those reformed courts will still be obliged to hand out prejudiced judgements and sentences.

clairefontaine

The Corinthian wrote: »

Atlas Shrugged, Irish style.

Freedom to travel. I'm sure the irony of this on a post about mens' rights does not pass you by.