Michael Flood – when equality becomes the new enemy of Feminism



A researcher by professional, but a lobbyist with scant regard for truth by actions -  Michael Flood

Well known for unethical behaviour

Editor: I just want to preface this excellent article with our own experience with Michael Flood. He has on a previous occasion mis-represented himself as a separated father in order to unethically and fraudulently gain access to our resources that we had struggled to make available for the benefit of distressed fathers.

He then proceeded to misuse these facilities and send out offensive letters in the name of Fathers4Equality to every member of the Australian federal parliament, in an effort to discredit and undermine our efforts and reputation.

We conclusively tracked down this misuse of our facilities to Michael Flood, at his University campus. We then contacted him and confronted him with this misuse of such important resources for separated and distressed fathers.

He initially denied and refuted his involvement in these bizarre actions, but in the face of overwhelming evidence he finally accepted that it was his actions, and his alone, and he apologized for these unethical acts.

It actually beggars belief that this man is supposed to be an impartial professional researcher in this very important field of gender equality, and yet he has behaved in a way more akin to a professional fraudster.

It goes without saying that anything you hear or read from Michael Flood should be seriously questioned, if his history of deception and fraud is anything to go by.

Michael Flood – political indoctrination or education?

A student who knows I have an interest in domestic violence research recently forwarded me an email invitation she (and presumably all students on the James Cook University mailing list) had received, inviting her to a seminar “He hits, she hits: Assessing debates regarding men’s and women’s experiences of domestic violence.” An initial small glimmer of hope that the title might have implied the seminar would present an unbiased gender neutral approach to a controversial topic quickly dissolved upon reading the flyer. A major component of the stated aim of the seminar was to “assesses the political character and agendas of those groups involved in advocating for a gender-equal approach to domestic violence.” The presenter of the seminar Michael Flood, a purported expert in the field, appears to be locked in the seventies and still cites the discredited Duluth model as the preferred theoretical basis for addressing family violence.

A quick check of Flood’s CV revealed a recent article published in a journal called “Violence Against Women” http://vaw.sagepub.com, nope you wont find any non gendered view of reality there, the journal title conveys the ideology within.

Not unexpectedly feminist ideologues posing as academics choose such forums to expound on their male hatred and it would be hard to find a better example than this 2010 article “ ‘Fathers’ Rights’ and the Defense of Paternal Authority in Australia” . The central tenant of this opinion piece long on dogma and short on evidence is that men should be denied their democratic right to express opinions on issues such as false allegations of domestic violence, residency and contact with their children, and bias within the family court because by doing so, they are increasing “violence against women” and turning back the “significant advances of feminism.”

Implicit throughout the article is the false and unsubstantiated linkage of “violence against women” and “child abuse” as if they are one in the same thing, implying that any “fear” contrived by a mother automatically translates to a “risk” for the child. It beggars belief that one credentialed as a sociologist could be so illiterate of human nature. The overwhelming desire most fathers is to protect their children, they are expected to and would gladly if needed sacrifice their own lives to protect their children, and many have done so in the past. Such protective instincts come acutely into focus when a malicious and vindictive mother wants to enlist the states power to remove children from the safest environment, an intact family, to the environment that is well known to pose the highest risk for children of abuse, the mother headed household.

Flood insists that these evil fathers rights groups use typical rhetorical devices such as “an appeal to formal equality, a language of rights and entitlement, claims to victim status (and) the conflation of children’s and fathers’ interests.” The implication being that somehow none of these well abused feminist tactics should be used to counter the ideology who pioneered them. Kinda reminds me of the “fight fair” idea espoused to “perpetrators” of DV, which essentially says don’t ague with a women, thats domestic abuse!

Although Flood is dismayed that men’s rights groups have achieved such visibility, he accepts that “Painful experiences of divorce and separation, as well as experiences of family law, produce a steady stream of men who can be recruited into fathers’ rights groups.” But rather then offering any concern for the steady stream of dispossessed men or addressing the cause of their pain, or acknowledging the consequent suicide rates for men, he laments that such increased numbers of recruits may increase the political influence of mens groups.

In Floods’ words it is quite acceptable that “Women’s movements in Australia have had a distinctively high level of direct involvement in government policy making, with feminist bureaucrats or “femocrats” playing key roles,” but quite unacceptable that “ Fathers’ rights groups have become vocal opponents of feminist perspectives.” His sexist agenda clearly being that women’s voices should not only be heard but acted upon, while mens groups should not even have the right to speak.

Amongst the supposed achievements of feminism he notes, is making “violence in the home a criminal offence.” No mention is made that criminal assault and battery has always been an offence no matter where it takes place, rather the achievement of feminism was creating a new class of criminal out of men who dared disagree with women, at a time disagreement is most likely to occur, after a women unilaterally decides to end a relationship. The women then uses control and power tactics to enlist the abuse industries considerable resources to achieve their often stated threat to financially ruin their spouse and alienate him from their children. This is the real state sanctioned and aided domestic violence and if it was, as it should be, acknowledged as such men would account for the majority of victims of domestic abuse.

The growth of the abuse industry and the propaganda machine that goes with it is, in Floods view a good thing, as are the erosion of civil rights by “expanded police powers”, “reduced standards of evidence” “quasi-criminal protection or restraining orders”. No mention is made of the vested financial interests of the hordes of abuse workers, lawyers, feminist pseudo-academics, and other hangers on who derive financial sustenance from such morally contemptible activities and whose motive is, to clearly grow their business. If this industry was results based and actually decreased domestic violence and conflict many would be unemployed, hence the perverse incentive to keep case loads high even if this means redefining domestic violence to include the most trivial infractions , and to “emphasise ‘reasonable’ fears regarding personal safety.”

In the circular illogic so typical of feminist thinking Flood claims to understand the motivation of men who bring contravention orders against malicious mothers who breech contact orders, claiming they are “harassing” the mother and have no genuine interest in contact with their children, when he more rightfully should be condemning the mother for acting illegally and breaching the basic human rights of the father and children. A man who does not seek contact (not being being violent in Floods view, by causing his spouse the discomfort of having to face changeover with him) will of course be labeled as distant and uncaring, simply another inequitable win and win again situation for the mother.

What merge attempt there is to justify his position relies more on rehashing the words of other ideologues then presenting credible evidence. The evidence he does cite relates to a handful of small case series without statistical power and extreme selection bias being derived from some of the more extreme cases dealt with in family courts. Ignored are the great mass of average men caught up in separation, divorce and the domineering and abusive actions of women wielding “their” children as weapons, never reaching a court room because they cant afford it financially or emotionally, they are correctly advised that their chances of success are negligible, or through altruism are not prepared to put their children through the emotional duress that such court action would bring.

Rather than crediting magistrates and solicitors working in the area of family law with having any understanding of what happens routinely in their own workplaces, Flood makes the ridiculous assertion that their views are based on pressure from mens rights groups. If 90% of magistrates believe that protection orders are used as a tactic in family court proceedings, then this is highly likely to be the case, they are certainly used in general as a power and control technique by women in separation and divorce. Weather they admit to it or not, all family law practitioners know this, and Australia is likely not far behind the USA when failure to recommend a protection order be taken out by women against their husband in such circumstances can be construed as “malpractice”. It’s not too difficult to see how DV statistics in general become bloated.

Further Flood argues that the changes requested by fathers groups are a betrayal of male victims of domestic violence, and are rhetorical rather than real. He writes “Such changes would represent a profound erosion of the rights and protections available to the victims of violence and the ease with which they and their advocates can seek justice.” Such a statement might hold some truth if indeed male victims of domestic violence were recognised or able to access even a fraction of the services and resources available to women, which of course they are not. Rather men who approach existing DV services are likely to have a feminist abuse worker accuse them of being a perpetrator and offer a program to help curb their violence, and there is certainly no “justice” to be gained from that.

Perhaps Floods’ grandest lunacy is the claim the research based “quantitative measurement instruments focused on acts of violence” are not actually measuring violence, but inventing it, effectively allowing him to though his feminist tinted glasses to ignore the large body of evidence showing the frightening extent of female on male and reciprocal violence. It should be noted that social scientists finding such evidence of female acts of DV have often been reluctant to publish their findings, and when they did, have faced vilification and even death threats from the same feminists who insist women are incapable of violence. The chilling accounts of abuse perpetrated on Erin Prizzy founder of the first UK first women’s shelter, and the death threats against Strauss/Gelles in the US are but 2 well known examples.

Flood concludes that “the efforts of the fathers’ rights movement in Australian family law are already putting women, children, and indeed men at greater risk of violence and abuse.” Even if he were correct which he is not, his solution is a totalitarian stifling of debate, and call for fathers groups to be silenced or ignored. Flood goes further than the Orwellian claim that that all animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others, to an outright claim that men are simply not equal at all. His female supremacist masters are not doubt proud of his efforts, but in defence of intellectual honesty should such a person by indoctrinating young and impressionable students, I think not.

http://www-public.jcu.edu.au/public/groups/everyone/documents/news_item/jcu_093632.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20133921

http://www.oneinthree.com.au/

http://www.erinpizzey.com/

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-09-02/ombudsman-finds-domestic-violence-campaign/2245608?section=justin

http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/ssmac/staff/UOW084229.html

Written by Greg Canning

If you enjoyed this article, Get email updates (It’s Free)
I will proofread your Child Custody Affidavit for $5

Other Related Articles:

'What about Male Victims?' - Qld govt provides $750,000 to Women's Legal Service
Lesbian Murders Man to Be with his Wife
Australian Govt has payed almost $1M for Feminist Coach
Regular Overnight Care with both Parents Recommended by most Social Researchers

If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.

87 Comments

  • www.youtube.com says:

    PSN Points get here for free:. http://www.psncodegenerator2013.info.

    Just try it, no regret I just got point codes from there!

    [Reply]

  • Sherri says:

    We are a group of volunteers and starting a new scheme
    in our community. Your website offered us with valuable info
    to work on. You’ve done a formidable job and our entire community will be grateful
    to you.

    [Reply]

  • Leora says:

    Currently it appears ike Expression Engine is tthe best blogging platform oout there
    right now. (from what I’ve read) Is that what you are
    using on your blog?

    [Reply]

  • Joie says:

    Tour companies, companies hiring out yachts & cruise companies have
    websites which give details on their offers.
    Many Vancouver yacht Rentals would offer yacht
    charters for corporate events Canada and yacht Rentals for wedding BC.
    Yachts are a luxury item and sailing in one connotes the ability to either own one outright or
    charter it to get a much more manageable approach.

    [Reply]

  • Nick Racanelli says:

    Did Michael Flood hate his father? Was he abused as a child?

    [Reply]

  • Hotels In General Santos City Philippines says:

    Hey there! I know this is kind of off topic but I was
    wondering if you knew where I could find a captcha plugin for my comment form?
    I’m using the same blog platform as yours and I’m having difficulty finding one?

    Thanks a lot!

    [Reply]

  • Robert E Kennedy says:

    So Flood broke his shoulder. Pity so close to better circumstances to be rid of a rogue advocacy researcher for feminist in their gender war against men. The hram this creep of a male has brought upon Aussie Blokes is disgusting in the extreme. Of course this eccentric rogue is being heard. Any one bad mouthing males and fathers in particular will be heard and repeated in this venomous feminist dominated administration of heterosexual service deliveries

    Its falsely perceived women know best when it comes to administering families and women and so venomous feminist and metro-sexual pro feminist males get to be staff running families and children on propaganda. Which the likes of Flood ‘research’ their self serving false stats and propaganda and come up with ‘advocacy’ research stereotyping and stigmatizing good heterosexual family men. Bringing accolades for Flood as a renowned researcher.

    On the other hand there is Murray Staus and Gelies who in 1977 developed the ‘statistical ascending scale of violence’ between heterosexual couples in dating and domestic relationships. It took random couples and alternative only one of opposite gender from each couple. Asking but recording statistically the answers to the frequency of (a) their victimisation (b) them as a perpetrator in ascending frequency of degree of violence (c) who struck the first blow. The latter called ‘self reporting’.

    In early 1990′s feminists accused Straus and Gelies of (the feminists own modus oprandi) advocacy statistics so they went through all of their research again of the self reporting sector. They found in both dating and domestic relationships women struck the first blow in 52% of the cases.

    Flood should be sacked for defrauding the University and the Taxpayer of funds to do advocacy research falsely in the name of family or domestic violence. Only as advocacy research for a feminists sole gender lobby group in their ideological ‘gender war’ against men.

    All should complying to the Chancellor of Wollongong University about this blatant fraudster.

    Keep up the mountain bike riding your victimised males may be luckier next on your next fall.

    Below is EMILY’s List feminist advocate politicians who use the Flood advocacy research crap against males of all constituency’s. May they and Flood rot in Hell for the great harm they bring via their corrupted administration of solely male blame in what are both gender perpetrator matters.

    Robert E Kennedy Coordinator
    NT Office Status of Family 08 8932 3339

    xxxxxxxxxxxx
    Current State/Territory
    Parliamentarians

    Katy Gallagher ACT Member for Molonglo, and Chief Minister

    Yvette Berry ACT Member for Ginninderra

    Joy Burch ACT Member for Brindabella

    Mary Porter ACT Member for Ginninderra

    Linda Burney NSW Member for Canterbury

    Noreen Hay NSW Member for Wollongong

    Sonia Hornery NSW Member for Wallsend

    Penny Sharpe NSW Member for Leg. Council

    Carmel Tebbutt NSW Member for Marrickville

    Lynda Voltz NSW Member for Leg. Council

    Helen Westwood NSW Member for Leg. Council

    Natasha Fyles NT Member for Nightcliff

    Delia Lawrie NT Member for Karama, and Opposition Leader

    Lynne Walker NT Member for Nhulunbuy

    Desley Scott QLD Member for Woodridge

    Jackie Trad QLD Member for South Brisbane

    Frances Bedford SA Member for Florey

    Lyn Breuer SA Member for Giles

    Susan Close SA Member for Port Adelaide

    Gail Gago SA Member for Leg. Council

    Robyn Geraghty SA Member for Torrens

    Stephanie Key SA Member for Ashford

    Grace Portolesi SA Member for Hartley

    Jennifer Rankine SA Member for Wright

    Gay Thompson SA Member for Reynell

    Lara Giddings TAS Member for Franklin, and Premier

    Michelle O’Byrne TAS Member for Bass

    Rebecca White TAS Member for Lyons

    Jacinta Allan VIC Member for Bendigo East

    Liz Beattie VIC Member for Yuroke

    Candy Broad VIC Member for Northern Victoria

    Lily D’Ambrosio VIC Member for Mill Park

    Kaye Darveniza VIC Member for Northern Victoria

    Joanne Duncan VIC Member for Macedon

    Maree Edwards VIC Member for Bendigo West

    Jane Garrett VIC Member for Brunswick

    Danielle Green VIC Member for Yan Yean

    Jill Hennessy VIC Member for Altona

    Natalie Hutchins VIC Member for Keilor

    Sharon Knight VIC Member for Ballarat West

    Jenny Mikakos VIC Member for Northern Metropolitan

    Lisa Neville VIC Member for Bellarine

    Bronwyn Pike VIC Member for Melbourne

    Jaala Pulford VIC Member for Western Victoria

    Fiona Richardson VIC Member for Northcote

    Gayle Tierney VIC Member for Western Victoria

    Sue Ellery WA Member for Leg. Council South Met.

    Carol Martin WA Member for Kimberley

    Sally Talbot WA Member for Leg. Council South West

    Lisa Baker WA Member for Maylands

    Janine Freeman WA Member for Nollamara

    Linda Savage WA Member for Leg. Council Eastern Metro

    Former Federal Members of
    Parliament

    Jennie George NSW Former Member for Throsby

    Kelly Hoare NSW Former Member for Charlton

    Julia Irwin NSW Former Member for Fowler

    Cheryl Kernot QLD Former Member for Dickson

    Kerry Rea QLD Former Member for Bonner

    Leonie Short QLD Former Member for Ryan

    Jodie Campbell TAS Former Member for Bass

    Sue Mackay TAS Former Senator

    Ann Corcoran VIC Former Member for Isaacs

    Sharryn Jackson WA Former Member for Hasluck

    Carmen Lawrence WA Former Member for Fremantle

    Jann McFarlane WA Former Member for Stirling

    Ruth Webber WA Former Senator

    Former State/Territory Members of
    Parliament

    Karin MacDonald ACT Former Member for Brindabella

    Verity Firth NSW Former Member for Balmain

    Alison Megarritty NSW Former Member for Menai

    Sandra Nori NSW Former Member for Port Jackson

    Karyn Paluzzano NSW Former Member for Penrith

    Christine Robertson NSW Former Member for Leg. Council

    Jane Aagard NT Former Member for Nightcliff

    Malarndirri McCarthy NT Former Member for Arnhem

    Clare Martin NT Former Member for Fannie Bay, and Chief Minister

    Kerry Sacilotto NT Former Member for Port Darwin

    Marion Scrymgour NT Former Member for Arafura

    Bonny Barry QLD Former Member for Aspley

    Anna Bligh QLD Former Member for South Brisbane, and Premier

    Desley Boyle QLD Former Member for Cairns

    Liddy Clark QLD Former Member for Clayfield

    Lesley Clark QLD Former Member for Barron River

    Wendy Edmond QLD Former Member for Mt Coot-tha

    Jan Jarratt QLD Former Member for Whitsunday

    Linda Lavarch QLD Former Member for Kurwongbah

    Lindy Nelson-Carr QLD Former Member for Mundingburra

    Rachel Nolan QLD Former Membe for Ipswich

    Dianne Reilly QLD Former Member for Mudgeeraba

    Christine Smith QLD Former Member for Burleigh

    Judy Spence QLD Former Member for Mt Gravatt, Sunnybank

    Barbara Stone QLD Former Member for Springwood

    Karen Struthers QLD Former Member for Algester

    Christine Scott QLD Former Member for Charters Towers

    Jane Lomax-Smith SA Former Member for Adelaide

    Lea Stevens SA Former Member for Little Para

    Fran Bladel TAS Former Member for Franklin

    Heather Butler TAS Former Member for Lyons

    Allison Ritchie TAS Former Member for Pembroke

    Lin Thorp TAS Former Legislative Council Member for Rumney

    Paula Wriedt TAS Former Member for Franklin

    Denise Allen VIC Former Member for Benalla

    Dympna Beard VIC Former Member for Kilsyth

    Rosy Buchanan VIC Former Member for Hastings

    Helen Buckingham VIC Former Member for Koonung Province

    Elaine Carbines VIC Former Member for Western Vic Province

    Mary Delahunty VIC Former Member for Northcote

    Anne Eckstein VIC Former Member for Ferntree Gully

    Dianne Hadden VIC Former Member for Ballarat Province

    Carolyn Hirsh VIC Former Member for Silvan Province

    Lynne Kosky VIC Former Member for Altona

    Maxine Morand VIC Former Member for Mount Waverley

    Janice Munt VIC Former Member for Mordialloc

    Karen Overington VIC Former Member for Ballarat West

    Glenyys Romanes VIC Former Member for Eastern Vic Province

    Megan Anwyl WA Former Member for Kalgoorlie

    Shelley Archer WA Former Member for Leg. Council

    Judy Edwards WA Former Member for Maylands

    Dianne Guise WA Former Member for Franklin

    Sheila McHale WA Former Member for Kenwick

    Alannah MacTiernan WA Former Member for Armadale

    Jaye Radisich WA Former Member for Swan Hills

    Copyright © 2013 EMILY’s List Australia. All rights reserved.
    Authorised by Lisa Carey, EMILY’s List, Level 2, Queen Victoria Women’s Centre,
    210 Lonsdale Street, Melbourne, VIC, 3000
    T 03 8668 8120 FREE 03 8668 8120 | F 03 8668 8125

    [Reply]

  • http://www.xfire.com/blog/anniebowle/4477640 says:

    Everyone loves it when folks get together and share ideas.
    Great website, keep it up!

    [Reply]

  • african mango diet pills says:

    Heya outstanding blog! Does running a blog similar
    to this require a massive amount work? I’ve very little knowledge of coding but I was hoping to start my own blog in the near future. Anyhow, if you have any suggestions or techniques for new blog owners please share. I know this is off topic however I just wanted to ask. Cheers!

    [Reply]

  • movers and packers in hyderabad says:

    This is a topic that is close to my heart… Best wishes!
    Exactly where are your contact details though?

    [Reply]

  • bradley mckell says:

    I stand for no violence against anyone but stand firmly against police brutality worldwide. We have ignored this issue now for so many decades tolerating government forced agendas through heavy handed enforcement agencies. I myself have been a victim of these crimes that was close to taking my life through a cracked skull by two New South Wales police officers.

    Violence by enforcement agencies has been ignored and with so many missing people and murders not solved in a world of pictures and cameras has to at least make you think a bit. The biggest law breakers are the law makers. I have tried to seek justice for not only the assault by police on myself by also a misdiagnoses of a mental illness. Well this only cost me more trouble and more laws and legislation broken against me.

    When any one of us citizens break a legislation we are incriminated and arrested then inconvenienced as well as our family even when you are not guilty. When the law makers or the likes break a law we hear nothing of it and if we do it is that they do not receive full consequences for their actions.

    Police brutality does so much to a person and the people around them. Depending on the severity of the assault a person can seem psychotic and delusional. This meaning if put before any mental health doctor one would surly be deemed mentally ill. Which leads to my question how many people are seen to be mentally ill for the simple reason they are misdiagnosed as medical science and governments refuse to acknowledge police brutality exists and therefore do no research in this field?

    Would being assaulted by police be just as bad as being raped? Well this is easy it is so much worse as these are the people one goes to if they are rapped. So what if a person is then rapped by a police officer who then can they turn to even if bashed when our system refuses to show any accountability for these horrific crimes to our communities.

    Maybe the answer is simple our governments with their hidden agendas are the very reason we have social break down as this works best for any agenda they may have be it good or bad.

    B.MCKELL / FREESTYLERFLYER

    [Reply]

  • damien leech says:

    i was assaulted by a white ribbon ambassador in an effort to make it seem like my girlfriend had set me up. it failed. but the efforts continued, my girlfriend ended up being the victim of a sexual assault as a consequence of those efforts. i didn’t assault her even though the falsehood was promulgated that i was under a domestic violence restraining order. when my girlfriend was raped, i contacted the white ribbon ambassador concerned and congratulated him on the outcome. the next day he left town and went to canberra at white ribbon hq for about a year. now he’s gone back to his original state, a different one, he’s listed as returned to a former job he had, manager for save the children. that ambassador is reputed for his extensive work with boys by the way. the thing is, his departure like that, it was tantamount to being a tacit admission of culpability for what happened to my girlfriend.
    you know, white ribbon have an oath. it says don’t tolerate abuse of women and don’t remain silent.
    michael flood has been both tolerant and silent in relation to the actions of that white ribbon ambassador that contributed toward my girlfriend being harmed. but then, i’ve seen into this thing going on, that it failed with me, that with so many they succeed, now they’re in trouble because this time they failed. now we know white ribbon have form for covertly promoting violence against women, the very worst thing. why would they do such a thing? that’s harsh to do that just to suit their political agenda. is that all it is i wonder. working with children? oh really, that’s reassuring nice white ribbon ambassadors working with children. michael flood has if indirectly become after the fact part of my girlfriend being hurt. like i said to that ambassador, i coined this phrase for him, the same applies,
    “do not fear that you may burn in hell ducture flud, because now it is assured”.
    at least you don’t have to worry about the uncertainty of it huh?
    you made your own bed floody mate. how’s that oath, you swearing, fluddy hell?
    do they pay him for research i wonder, when it’s just pinching other people’s, taking what suits his platform and repackaging it. is that research?
    oh and what about jackson katz, he make the flight okay? weren’t those guys from the fbi looking for him or something, what i hear?
    shucks.

    [Reply]

  • bradley mckell says:

    Ok well if I might say this Country has been living far from any democracy and for many years now we have all been living in a bureaucracy one step away from Communism.

    If you do not have faith in my words here please feel free to book an appointment with your local member to enlighten you of this fact.

    We are dictated, manipulated, incriminated, discriminated this is just for J WALKING? DO NOT CROSS WHILE RED LIGHT FLASHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Yes it is fact we can not even get passed a red light on the fucking road without being arrested now so what chance does a real man have without EQUALITY ???????????????????

    Rising to beat governments hidden agendas bringing back family benders community blenders political descenders equalizing scales knocking in nails keeping people of bails and wind in their sails love never fails it hails, derails live as one shhhhhhhit its already BEGUN. FREESTYLERFLYER
    United we stand divided we fall
    community standing for unity
    with all the family its hereditary

    FREESTYLERFLYER / B.MCKELL

    [Reply]

  • ZimbaZumba says:

    A description of Michael Floods unethical behavior should be added to his Wikipedia entry.

    [Reply]

    zac Reply:

    Howard Beale’s forensic breakdown of Dr Flood’s behaviour is quite concise and passionately delivered..well done Howard.

    There are many government bodies that hold statistics on the ‘percieved’ high incidence of false allegations of child/spousal physical/sexual abuse particularly around family separation, custody/property disputes and divorce. It may take F.O.I. requests and more forensic analysis to find the true percentage of suspected/found FALSE allegations out there.

    Police and other child protection agencies (such as DHS, Vic. ) are accutely aware of false reporting and the high percentages of wasted resourses due to false reports.

    Here are two known facts from Victoria Police (but unconfirmed officially)
    * 40% of police work in Victoria is domestic related.
    * 20% of child sexual assault/abuse claims in Victoria are FOUND to be spurious claims made in, typically, child custody disputes.

    source; Female Supt. in charge of SOCAU. 2006.

    Feminist and Family Law groups will not want any scrutiny of such statistics so it will be up to a compitant sociologist, investigator, researcher to drill down to the facts and compile them.

    Most of us want the truth, some (as Jack Nicholson once bellowed in ‘A Few Good Men’ ) “….cant handle the truth ! ”

    In a democracy, such as ours, we can NEVER be silenced from searching for the truth. I say that we also owe that quest to our kids. Strength to all truth seekers.

    [Reply]

  • Howard Beale says:

    Comment by Michael Flood:
    Howard Beale gets a whole bunch of things wrong. In brief;
    My material on false allegations of violence and abuse came from a published journal article, not a ‘blog’, though I also summarised it for a ‘fact sheet’ I put up on the website XY.
    In relation to the Wikipedia page, I was the one who recommended it for deletion, after the page turned into hate text. But Wikipedia editors argued for its retention.
    I’ve never instructed anyone to lie in Family Court.
    I did edit the page anonymously, but did so out of naivety rather than dishonesty. More recently I’ve created a Wikipedia log-in and used this. (Yes, go read the Wikipedia discussion to see this history.)
    As for being a metrosexual, feminised wanker, I’m guilty as charged.
    Cheers,
    Michael Flood.

    The essay format appears to be causing Dr Flood some difficulty. We don’t want anyone to miss out on credit marks simply because they’re unable to answer simple and straightforward questions, so let’s make it a dot-point and short answer format.

    1. “My material on false allegations of violence and abuse came from a published journal article, not a ‘blog’, though I also summarised it for a ‘fact sheet’ I put up on the website XY”

    Hmm, strangely you don’t name the journal or mention peer-review. Which roughly translates to it was thrown in the crap bin.

    But wait! There’s a link!

    Here’s a tip for those playing along at home: Google “Senate Report family violence bill” and see what’s on page 38 in particular the footnote 79.

    FOR THE RECORD
    “… the clear and succinct synopsis of the research in this area prepared and appropriately referenced by Dr Michael Flood, a sociologist at the University of Wollongong:

    He concludes that child abuse allegations in the context of family law proceedings have been researched in four* Australian studies and have found that:

    – False allegations are rare;
    – The allegations rarely are made for tactical advantage;
    – Any such allegation rarely results in the denial of parental
    contact.

    In relation to [the] myth about false accusations of domestic violence and misuse of protection orders he again analyses the research succinctly and concludes:

    – Most allegations of domestic violence in the context
    of family law proceedings are made in good faith and
    with support and evidence of their claims;
    – Women living with domestic violence often do not
    take out protection orders and do so only as a last resort;
    – Protection orders provide an effective means of
    reducing women’s vulnerability to violence.[79]

    [Fuck me. Is this boofhead on heavy duty lithium or what?
    Flood, how much of that shit are you taking]

    [79] see Dr Michael Flood, ‘Fact Sheet #2: The myth of women and false accusations of domestic violence and rape and misuse of protection orders’, available at:
    .xyonline.net/content/fact-sheet-2-myth-women’s-false-accusations-domestic-violence-and-misuse-protection-orders (accessed 26 July 2011); Dr Michael Flood, ‘Fact Sheet #1: The myth of false accusations of child abuse’, available at:
    .xyonline.net/content/fact-sheet-1-myth-false-accusations-child-abuse (accessed 26 July 2011)”

    So the Senate Report identifies Flood’s personal blog, XYonline, as the source for the material considered in its recommendations. The lead researcher personally confirmed verifying the online hyperlink supplied.

    And this Committee [chaired by Ms Crossin (Status of Women spokesperson), Ms Pratt (married to a transman), Ms Siewart (brainfart)] concludes at page 61 paragraph 3.169

    “… the committee accepts the research findings of Dr
    Michael Flood and, in particular, the finding that false
    allegations are rarely made.”

    The determining factor for our most important social policy, the future of our children, and the sacrifice of our justice system is the propaganda “women don’t lie and men deny allegations to further abuse women”.

    This was googled off the personal blog of Australia’s #1 pro-feminist manhater Michael Flood – a self-confessed liar who claims to be puerile naïve (at 40 years of age).

    [Wonder why the Green/ALP controlled Senate passed a guillotine motion the night before the Family Violence Bill was scheduled for debate, this allowed 2hrs scrutiny for 5 bills, voted to adjourn the Senate 3 days early – despite the legislative overload used to justify the guillotine - to avoid any question time and sacked AG McClelland]

    [Reply]

    Howard Beale Reply:

    Maybe, I’m being a bit harsh. Let’s examine these ‘well referenced’ research findings.

    The “fact sheet” appears to simply re-interpret work done mostly by international researchers to make findings not found by the researchers themselves. Moreover, save for Jaffe in 2008 all of that research was done before the Australian Family Law Act was significantly changed in 2006 with the Shared Parental Responsibility amendments.

    Any scientist knows that trying to make conclusions about human behaviour through this one valid example is bloody idiotic. No problem for Dr Flood reasoning was thrown out long ago in favour of hysterics.

    He usurps the creditability of other people’s work by referencing, takes responses from one study out of context and grafts them onto questions to which they are inapplicable to manufacture data that supports his own predetermined conclusion. The efficiency is admirable. The integrity not so much.

    There is no evidence for these findings other than his own prejudices. Flood’s research advocacy is nakedly, self-serving bull – laughed out of any self-respecting sociology faculty (ANU->La Trobe->Wollongong->Coles deli)

    And this is supposed to justify eviscerating the fundamental principles of Western jurisprudence, namely, the presumption of innocence and protections against perjury. This places all of us at risk. Kiddies sentenced to the dismal cultural lethality of absent fathers. Feminist extremists and controlled girlie-men with tripe research can run around screaming alleged abuse like adolescent meth-heads with Tourettes with impunity while innocent fathers are treated the way Gollum treats the sun.

    Well done, Mr Flood, champion of extremist and ideological stupidity, vulgar victimhood, vile personal conduct and preposterous self-promotion. However your sordid career is finished, drowned in a long bath of vomitus, literal and metaphorical, that reveals very minor talent which is no excuse or explanation for the harm done.

    In a way it is fortunate that Flood is such a fraud. The Gruberment citing his junk science exposes the political-family law industry corruption.

    Judicial discretion can now be justifiably harnessed by imposing a presumption of equal shared care and funding for University gender studies slashed or simply abolished as Norway has done. Stop the gravy train for these otherwise unemployable academics. Strike while the irony’s hot Mr Abbott.

    2. “In relation to the Wikipedia page, I was the one who recommended it for deletion, after the page turned into hate text. But Wikipedia editors argued for its retention”

    Bullshit, Utter Bullshit. How do such people manage to walk upright let alone get taxpayer funding?

    First, you authored your own biography. This is sufficient ground for deletion. To then claim that you asked for it to be deleted after these objections were raised is nonsense. Wikipedia removed the content to stub-status before deletion. You argued with yourself & supporters for your favourable editing of your own self-promoting biography. And Michael if you were any good someone else would write it.

    3. “I’ve never instructed anyone to lie in Family Court.”

    Apparently Flood Fraud includes the power of not grasping analogies; of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments of as a means of protective stupidity. Learn to read dumfuck. I said “he EFFECTIVELY instructed…” You would have to an idiot of near unimaginable levels not to extend your “How to sabotage fathers rights” speech to the family court.

    4. “I did edit the page anonymously, but did so out of naivety rather than dishonesty. More recently I’ve created a Wikipedia log-in and used this.”

    Naivety! I thought it was peri peri chicken

    You’ve already used the naivety excuse after you were caught using the Fathers4Equality megaphone to repeatedly write, on the spur of the moment, 500 words of cogent argument in itemised paragraphs with hyperlink references to MPs as a father not vote for shared parenting legislation. That you denied this until it became undeniable and then tried to minimise it as being naïve – at 40 years of age with a PhD – constitutes professional malfeasance that should have you stuck off.

    And using a Wikipedia log-in after being caught is not really mitigating behaviour is it Michael?

    5. As for being a metrosexual, feminised wanker, I’m guilty as charged.

    The poor buggerer presents as a not very well controlled Gender Identity Disorder. Scrambled genetics the culprit maybe unusual combination of oestrus hormones.
    Go to your local hospital and get some help for evolution’ sake please.
    Or at least call your case worker.
    Seriously.

    [Reply]

    Howard Beale Reply:

    And more disgusting mind pollution from the then childless Flood in an Online opinion article. “Quality, not quantity, makes all the difference for fathering”. No comments.

    Michael Flood is resplendent with such opinions. Many of the pieces on his site are just fanciful and serve to discredit the field of sociology and feminist movement. However, with the present feminist-controlled government his sickening, morally bereft and ethically fucked up extremism is dangerous. He must be purged as the intellectually illiterate and morally fly-blown fraud that he is.

    Importantly Flood has embarrassed the Government. The Attorney General has been dumped. Chris Evans, the leader of the Senate, current minister for tertiary studies and former shadow minister for families is vulnerable and knows he has failed to do the right thing about family law.

    In my view our efforts to purge Flood must include Evans, his shadow and his state counterpart, Adrian Piccoli, Minister for Education NSW. These politicians control the money to the Universities. Correspondences to the Wollongong department should be cc’d to the ministers. [addresses supplied below]

    At issue is whether the Wollongong gender studies program should be suspended, dismantled, or terminated, whether the sociology faculty has achieved academic success, whether its gender studies program is an effective program, whether that program is being taught in accordance with legal standards of non-discrimination. The state may withhold 10 percent of the monthly funding until it brings its courses into compliance with the law.

    Teaching oppression objectively is quite different than actively presenting material in a biased, political, and emotionally charged manner, which is what has self-evidently occurred in Flood’s classes. Teaching in such a manner promotes social or political activism against men, promotes gender discrimination, and advocates feminist solidarity, instead of treating pupils as individuals.

    If we toss one bum out, the others will take notice. Money. It’s the only thing they understand.

    [Reply]

    Greg Canning Reply:

    I,m hearing you Howard, loud and clear, but we need to expose this to the general public in a way that draw the usual response about angry fathers rights groups just wanting to promote more “violence against women and their children” Check out your Facebook , I have sent you a private message, we may have a plan.

    cheers

    Greg

    [Reply]

    Greg Canning Reply:

    of course that should read “in a way that does NOT draw the usual response”

    Michael Flood Reply:

    Howard, for someone who’s ostensibly troubled by false accusations, you seem content to throw your own around. For the record:
    I didn’t author the original Wikipedia entry on me. I stumbled across it, and saw that it was essentially an attack page. I then did make edits to it, as the Wikipedia history documents.
    Yes, the government inquiry relied on the ‘fact sheet’, not the journal article on which this was based. But my fact sheet was a summary of the journal article. I’ve reproduced the journal article here: http://www.xyonline.net/content/fathers-rights-and-defence-paternal-authority-australia. It was published in a journal ranked at A in the ERA’s journal rankings, making it a high-ranked journal.
    I’ll be interested to see when you actually tackle the substance of my claims, rather than throwing around personal hostilities.
    Cheers,
    Michael Flood.

    [Reply]

    bradley mckell Reply:

    Well Flood you do not get my vote as your own words I quote >>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 – 09:51 | Michael Flood
    More articles about:

    Activism & Politics
    Fathering
    Men’s & fathers’ rights

    Feminism’s achievements regarding violence against women are a key target for the fathers’ rights movement. This article provides an overview of the impact of the fathers’ rights movement on men’s violence against women. It documents the ways in which fathers’ rights groups in Australia have influenced changes in family law, which privilege parental contact over safety, particularly through moves toward a presumption of children’s joint residence. They have attempted to discredit female victims of violence, to wind back the legal protections available to victims and the sanctions imposed on perpetrators, and to undermine services for the victims of men’s violence.

    Citation: Flood, Michael. (2010). ‘Fathers’ Rights’ and the Defense of Paternal Authority in Australia. Violence Against Women, 16(3), 328-347.

    Please see below for the full article, in PDF.

    How do you really know anything other than the very fact your living from tax payer funding. I have eyes and I can read all I see is a man with no real clue of family and its networks. Is this not you here saying us fathers longing for our children are pissed off for not getting equality than dam straight.
    The more you talk the more I see academic spew if anything the more academic the less in touch with the wider community. I could spend 4 years behind door and reading books to and publish my own but I am not out to gain fame from some one else s name.
    Give up your job to someone who really cares for children not a pussy poser like you who clearly has not clue. Take your own words back recycle them and try get them out right. Its so wrong and aims a direct shot at fathers or any groups of fathers trying to rally for their own children.
    So it is ok for homo and lesso groups to rally to have our bloody kids but we as the hetro are not even allowed to cry foul? Get it right shit?????????????????????????

    Michael Flood Reply:

    “That you denied this until it became undeniable and then tried to minimise it as being naïve”. Again, Howard, I never denied it. I *signed my name* to it. Yes, I used the Megaphone for a purpose contrary to its intended purpose, and I put my name to it.
    Michael.

    [Reply]

    Greg Canning Reply:

    Yes Michael that link takes us to the Article the critique of which was the subject of the original post in this thread

    Violence Against Women. 2010 Mar;16(3):328-47. “Fathers’ rights” and the defense of paternal authority in Australia.Flood M. Source La Trobe University, Ainslie, Australia. mflood@vichealth.vic.gov.au

    A critique that so far has not been addressed by any of your comments here. I wonder why not?

    I think we know why not.

    If social research ever bothered to actually ask men about their experiences, or conducted true scientific hypothesis testing rather then the advocacy research so typical of funding monopolised feminist pseudo-academics, or adopted a non gendered approach to violence to violence as is the gold standard in other areas ( child abuse, elder abuse etc) the answers would be very clear.

    Rather we have a well funded, well resourced, agenda driven, gender biased academic discipline, whose ideology can even taint what should be data from reputable sources such as the ABS, and AIHW, AIFS. Much of which will be exposed to public and political scrutiny in the coming months. Along with the “plan” to further trample on the human and constitutional rights off fathers and children in Australia.

    “National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their children ”

    http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/sa/women/progserv/violence/nationalplan/Pages/default_new.aspx

    Craig Minns Reply:

    Michael,
    Whether you put your name to it or not is irrelevant. The fact is that you behaved unethically, just as you advocate unethical behaviour by others as a means of constructing the society you claim to want and just as you have behaved unethically in misrepresenting the views of those who disagree with you.

    Frankly, it’s not something I’d be proud to put my name to. Obviously you hold yourself to a lower standard than others might regard as reasonable.

    bradley mckell Reply:

    Well said HOWARD this Flood is a coward.

    HOWARD SHIT MATE BLOODY HELL MUST YOU MAKE THE REST OF US LOOK CRAP WITH SUCH WORDS OF LOVELY PROFANITY *****WELL FRUCKEN DONE BRA*****

    HERE HERE TO HOWARD

    FREESTYLERFLYER/ B.MCKELL

    [Reply]

  • Howard Beale says:

    Comment by Michael Flood:
    Howard Beale gets a whole bunch of things wrong. In brief;
    My material on false allegations of violence and abuse came from a published journal article, not a ‘blog’, though I also summarised it for a ‘fact sheet’ I put up on the website XY.
    In relation to the Wikipedia page, I was the one who recommended it for deletion, after the page turned into hate text. But Wikipedia editors argued for its retention.
    I’ve never instructed anyone to lie in Family Court.
    I did edit the page anonymously, but did so out of naivety rather than dishonesty. More recently I’ve created a Wikipedia log-in and used this. (Yes, go read the Wikipedia discussion to see this history.)
    As for being a metrosexual, feminised wanker, I’m guilty as charged.
    Cheers,
    Michael Flood.

    The essay format appears to be causing Dr Flood some difficulty. We don’t want anyone to miss out on credit marks simply because they’re unable to answer simple and straightforward questions, so let’s make it a dot-point and short answer format.

    1. “My material on false allegations of violence and abuse came from a published journal article, not a ‘blog’, though I also summarised it for a ‘fact sheet’ I put up on the website XY”

    Hmm, strangely you don’t name the journal or mention peer-review. Which roughly translates to it was thrown in the crap bin.

    But wait! There’s a link!

    Here’s a tip for those playing along at home: Google “Senate Report family violence bill” and see what’s on page 38 in particular the footnote 79.

    FOR THE RECORD
    “… the clear and succinct synopsis of the research in this area prepared and appropriately referenced by Dr Michael Flood, a sociologist at the University of Wollongong:

    He concludes that child abuse allegations in the context of family law proceedings have been researched in four* Australian studies and have found that:

    – False allegations are rare;
    – The allegations rarely are made for tactical advantage;
    – Any such allegation rarely results in the denial of parental
    contact.

    In relation to [the] myth about false accusations of domestic violence and misuse of protection orders he again analyses the research succinctly and concludes:

    – Most allegations of domestic violence in the context
    of family law proceedings are made in good faith and
    with support and evidence of their claims;
    – Women living with domestic violence often do not
    take out protection orders and do so only as a last resort;
    – Protection orders provide an effective means of
    reducing women’s vulnerability to violence.[79]

    [Fuck me. Is this boofhead on heavy duty lithium or what?
    Flood, how much of that shit are you taking]

    [79] see Dr Michael Flood, ‘Fact Sheet #2: The myth of women and false accusations of domestic violence and rape and misuse of protection orders’, available at:
    http://www.xyonline.net/content/fact-sheet-2-myth-women’s-false-accusations-domestic-violence-and-misuse-protection-orders (accessed 26 July 2011); Dr Michael Flood, ‘Fact Sheet #1: The myth of false accusations of child abuse’, available at:
    http://www.xyonline.net/content/fact-sheet-1-myth-false-accusations-child-abuse (accessed 26 July 2011)”

    So the Senate Report identifies Flood’s personal blog, XYonline, as the source for the material considered in its recommendations. The lead researcher personally confirmed verifying the online hyperlink supplied.

    And this Committee [chaired by Ms Crossin (Status of Women spokesperson), Ms Pratt (married to a transman), Ms Siewart (brainfart)] concludes at page 61 paragraph 3.169

    “… the committee accepts the research findings of Dr
    Michael Flood and, in particular, the finding that false
    allegations are rarely made.”

    The determining factor for our most important social policy, the future of our children, and the sacrifice of our justice system is the propaganda “women don’t lie and men deny allegations to further abuse women”.

    This was googled off the personal blog of Australia’s #1 pro-feminist manhater Michael Flood – a self-confessed liar who claims to be puerile naïve (at 40 years of age).

    [Wonder why the Green/ALP controlled Senate passed a guillotine motion the night before the Family Violence Bill was scheduled for debate, this allowed 2hrs scrutiny for 5 bills, voted to adjourn the Senate 3 days early – despite the legislative overload used to justify the guillotine - to avoid any question time and sacked AG McClelland]

    [Reply]

  • Howard Beale says:

    Comment by Michael Flood:
    Howard Beale gets a whole bunch of things wrong. In brief;
    My material on false allegations of violence and abuse came from a published journal article, not a ‘blog’, though I also summarised it for a ‘fact sheet’ I put up on the website XY.
    In relation to the Wikipedia page, I was the one who recommended it for deletion, after the page turned into hate text. But Wikipedia editors argued for its retention.
    I’ve never instructed anyone to lie in Family Court.
    I did edit the page anonymously, but did so out of naivety rather than dishonesty. More recently I’ve created a Wikipedia log-in and used this. (Yes, go read the Wikipedia discussion to see this history.)
    As for being a metrosexual, feminised wanker, I’m guilty as charged.
    Cheers,
    Michael Flood.

    The essay format appears to be causing Dr Flood some difficulty. We don’t want anyone to miss out on credit marks simply because they’re unable to answer simple and straightforward questions, so let’s make it a dot-point and answer format.

    1. “My material on false allegations of violence and abuse came from a published journal article, not a ‘blog’, though I also summarised it for a ‘fact sheet’ I put up on the website XY”

    Hmm, strangely you don’t name the journal or mention peer-review. Which roughly translates to it was thrown in the crap bin.

    But wait! There’s a link!

    Here’s a tip for those playing along at home: Google “Senate Report family violence bill” and see what’s on page 38 in particular the footnote 79.

    FOR THE RECORD
    “… the clear and succinct synopsis of the research in this area prepared and appropriately referenced by Dr Michael Flood, a sociologist at the University of Wollongong:

    He concludes that child abuse allegations in the context of family law proceedings have been researched in four* Australian studies and have found that:

    – False allegations are rare;
    – The allegations rarely are made for tactical advantage;
    – Any such allegation rarely results in the denial of parental
    contact.

    In relation to [the] myth about false accusations of domestic violence and misuse of protection orders he again analyses the research succinctly and concludes:

    – Most allegations of domestic violence in the context
    of family law proceedings are made in good faith and
    with support and evidence of their claims;
    – Women living with domestic violence often do not
    take out protection orders and do so only as a last resort;
    – Protection orders provide an effective means of
    reducing women’s vulnerability to violence.[79]

    [Fuck me. Is this boofhead on heavy duty lithium or what?
    Flood, how much of that shit are you taking]

    [79] see Dr Michael Flood, ‘Fact Sheet #2: The myth of women and false accusations of domestic violence and rape and misuse of protection orders’, available at:
    http://www.xyonline.net/content/fact-sheet-2-myth-women’s-false-accusations-domestic-violence-and-misuse-protection-orders (accessed 26 July 2011); Dr Michael Flood, ‘Fact Sheet #1: The myth of false accusations of child abuse’, available at:
    http://www.xyonline.net/content/fact-sheet-1-myth-false-accusations-child-abuse (accessed 26 July 2011)”

    So the Senate Report identifies Flood’s personal blog, XYonline, as the source for the material considered in its recommendations. The lead researcher personally confirmed verifying the online hyperlink supplied.

    And this Committee [chaired by Ms Crossin (Status of Women spokesperson), Ms Pratt (married to a transman), Ms Siewart (brainfart)] concludes at page 61 paragraph 3.169

    “… the committee accepts the research findings of Dr
    Michael Flood and, in particular, the finding that false
    allegations are rarely made.”

    The determining factor for our most important social policy, the future of our children, and the sacrifice of our justice system is the propaganda “women don’t lie and men deny allegations to further abuse women”.

    This was googled off the personal blog of Australia’s #1 pro-feminist manhater Michael Flood – a self-confessed liar who claims to be puerile naïve (at 40 years of age).

    [Wonder why the Green/ALP controlled Senate passed a guillotine motion the night before the Family Violence Bill was scheduled for debate, this allowed 2hrs scrutiny for 5 bills, voted to adjourn the Senate 3 days early – despite the legislative overload used to justify the guillotine - to avoid any question time and sacked AG McClelland]

    [Reply]

  • Dags says:

    Hey Zac,

    Yeah its a wierd world out there for pedophiles these days!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Apparently, he was just inspecting an ingrown hair in her “groin area” and rubbing Vicks on her chest????????????????????????????

    FFS, I wouldn’t rub Vicks on her chest or inspect an “ingrown” hair in her upper thigh area…….why is a complete stranger able to do that?????????????????????????????????????????????????

    I gather its a bit like Dr. Micheal Flood “researching” gay pornography and little boys??

    I quote Dr. Flood from above:
    “As for being a metrosexual, feminised wanker, I’m guilty as charged.
    Cheers,
    Michael Flood.”

    Anyhow, I struggle to go to sleep at night that I was unable to do justice for my child that reported this abomination to me and “authorities” were unable (or forced not to) respond.

    keep on fighting,

    Dags

    [Reply]

  • Dags says:

    Hey Zac,

    [Reply]

  • bradley mckell says:

    How sad that it is that man is his only enemy all the science knowledge and people with lovely tickets abound yet solutions even to how the hell Egypt and their pyramids abound.

    Again and again the only problem I see is one and all of us as if we do not take the blame equally than an equal answer will not come for the best of equality.

    Simple things in life
    United we stand
    Survival in hand
    Together as one
    Ability
    Inventive
    Neutral
    Agriculture
    Believing
    Intense
    Level
    Intent
    Temperament
    Yourself
    NOTICE THESE WORDS SPELL ALONG SIDE
    (SUSTAINABILITY)
    SUS HOW SUSTAINABILITY IS NOT TALKED ABOUT SUS HOW SUSPECTS WALK FREE WHILE THE INNOCENT AND INNOCENTS OF MAN IS RAPPED FROM US. YES ILL GO ON IT IS SUS NOT TO SUSTAIN OUR GREAT WIDE LAND. SUS YES IT IS ALL SUSPICIOUS WE HAVE SUSPICIONS SUCH A SUSPENSE DO NOT SIT ON A FENCE
    SUSTAINABILITY

    FREESTYLERFLYER
    B.McKell

    [Reply]

  • Dags says:

    Received this in my email:
    Author: Michael Flood
    Comment:
    Howard Beale gets a whole bunch of things wrong. In brief;
    My material on false allegations of violence and abuse came from a published journal article, not a ‘blog’, though I also summarised it for a ‘fact sheet’ I put up on the website XY.
    In relation to the Wikipedia page, I was the one who recommended it for deletion, after the page turned into hate text. But Wikipedia editors argued for its retention.
    I’ve never instructed anyone to lie in Family Court.
    I did edit the page anonymously, but did so out of naivety rather than dishonesty. More recently I’ve created a Wikipedia log-in and used this. (Yes, go read the Wikipedia discussion to see this history.)
    As for being a metrosexual, feminised wanker, I’m guilty as charged.
    Cheers,
    Michael Flood.

    Dr Foold,

    Your not fooling me with your pu$$y whipped lies. I suggest that perhaps you might consider getting some pu$$y lips attached to your face and a clit-ring through your nose you fraud.

    You wrote that you put up a fact sheet on website “xy”. We all know it was on website “xx” (xx being the female sex chromosomes and xy the male chromosomes)

    You also state that you “never instructed anyone to lie in the Family Court”.

    That statement is the hallmark of all the child abusing, criminal lawyers who operate within the Family Court, you have just placed yourself (again) amongst the realms of that filth.

    Personally, I hope on your deathbed you are “treated” by a Father who just happens to be a nurse (and a loving father) who has faced the disasterous implications of your agenda.

    Do you wish you were born a woman? I just cannot fathom where you come from with your simplistic, idealistic agenda?

    And for your research, perhaps you can keep in mind that when I suggested to my ex-wife that I was sick of her abusive demands and alcoholic filth that we should seperate and that I had found a house around the corner so the children would be less “interrupted” by seperation, I had a huge knife placed on my throat and was told “when we seperate you had better get a big dog!!!”

    Now my 10 year old daughter has come to me in private to tell me that my ex’s new partner (oh how I would love to name the @#$% here) has been touching her private parts including breasts and vagina!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Do you reckon the POLICE will do anything about it………………….NO

    Its the right of the new “dads” to do this sick shi&.

    Dr. Flood (Foold). I put you in that category…..A SICK DAD.

    I hope your son, one day realises what you have done to children with your bigotted, sexist, useless research.

    Dr. Dags

    [Reply]

    zac Reply:

    Dags…sorry to hear your family plight..but if your daughter understands truth and wrong doing( as it appears) you should take her to child protection services straight away…it’s your duty now and if you don’t, you are committing an offence.(new national laws on notification) good luck

    [Reply]

    Dags Reply:

    Hi Zac,

    Did that. I was told they were not interested as there as far more serious cases of abuse out there

    d

    [Reply]

    zac Reply:

    You got the wrong response Dags.Your daughter must be interviewed and, if true, mother’s boyfriend put on sex offenders register…go to superiors.. help your daughter… what else would you do? Break the boyfriend’s nose when he re-offends on your daughter? Make them do their job or contact ombudsman, state A.G. or local state M.P. Don’t be silent if you believe your daughter. As an adult,(in 10 years time) she will be judging your next protective move.

  • bradley mckell says:

    As a hetro guy i must ask what the fu** is METRO SEXUAL?

    HETRO (NO 1)
    HOMO
    BI
    LEZZO

    What the frig is METRO is this not cruelty to animals someone report this guy to RSPCA today. I have herd of METROPOLITAN AND METROPOLIS but METRO SEXUAL ?
    Wow this guy aint well nothing better than pussy smell. That is what a hetro would yell though you have a different story to tell as you seem to get of on a some weird smell.

    Sorry if i do not see this new sexual name in front of me. Psychology along with mental science may help this mans defiance. This is strange mentally deranged and I thought my head was on the wrong page.

    FREESTYLERFLYER
    B.McKell

    [Reply]

    Howard Beale Reply:

    “what the fu** is METRO SEXUAL?”

    To metrosexualise men, that is to degender and deball us, is the objective of the “National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and THEIR children”

    A Post Gender Normative Man (Metrosexual) Tries to Pick Up a Woman at a Bar.

    Hey, how’s it going? Mind if I sidle up? I saw you over here sitting alone and I thought, that’s fine. A woman should be able to self-sustain. In fact a lot of women are choosing to stay alone, what with advances in salary equitability and maternity extensions, and I think it’s an important and compelling trend.

    I noticed that you were about to finish your drink and I was wondering if I could possibly watch you purchase another one. And, at the risk of being forward, if you could possibly purchase one for me.

    What do you do? And before you answer, I’m not looking for a necessarily work-related response. I don’t think we have to be defined by our industrial pursuits, especially when they’re antiquated and hetero-normative. I curse my mother, who is an otherwise lovely human person, for not buying me an Easy-Bake Oven when I was younger. I grew up idolizing male thugs like Neil Armstrong and Jimmy Carter. And, yes, I work at ESPN, but I spend more time being spiritual and overcoming adversity, for example, than I do working for some faceless corporation. And if I were to find a mate, be it you or someone else here tonight, I would be more than happy to tell the proverbial “man” that I quit so I can raise our offspring with gender-neutral hobbies, while my biologically female partner continues to pursue her interests, be they industrial, recreational or yes, even sexual with another mate.

    So…

    Crazy news about the first female African head of state and Liberia’s sitting president, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, huh? Announcing her candidacy for 2011 so soon! Wow. What do you think of her chances? I think she’s a shoo-in, but I’m admittedly a bit concerned about Prince Johnson making some last minute strides, especially amongst the Gio people in the Nimba region. I’m thinking of launching a letter writing campaign on behalf of EJ-S or at least cold calling potential Nimba voters over Skype.

    Oh, how gauche of me! I’ve just been chattering away incessantly like some kind of boy or girl who talks a lot. I haven’t even properly introduced myself. Although, one often gets the uneasy sense that patriarchy dictates a learned and ultimately damaging order of events with men taking an unearned lead. My name is Terri, with a heart over the i, instead of a dot. I have a heart, is what that says, and I’m not afraid to wear it on my sleeve.

    So what do you think? Would you like to take me up on my offer for you to buy me that drink?

    If you would like to respond, that would be wonderful. Of course, if you would like to continue to sit here silently, staring at me with that powerful gaze, which both breaks gender constructs and also scares me a bit, that would be fine as well.

    What’s that? I should go fuck myself? I agree! Men should be more self-generative! Thank you for your astute assertion. Why should women exclusively have to bear the burden of childbirth, when men are biologically doomed to fear commitment? It’s counter-intuitive and socially degrading.

    Ahh, that beer is refreshing! Thank you for throwing it in my face on this warm summer evening.

    Okay, okay! I’m leaving!

    Thank you for your blunt rejection of me. It takes a lot of courage, which you no doubt have in equal measure to any other human. Now, if you’ll excuse, I’m going to the bathroom where I’ll cry silently in a stall, questioning my body and texting my mom, but for now, I thank you for your time, which was equal to mine.

    This is our future under Gillard.

    Men how would you like to be beside this “bloke” in the Gallipoli trenches or ladies relying on him to stop the japs on the Kokoda trail.

    There is an important documentary article on the fathers4equality reddit page (link to the right) which exposes how academic censorship and the ideology of a small elite corrupted Norway social policy. Government funding (56M) of gender studies was stopped within months of its airing.

    It is important that readers sign the F4E Strength in Numbers Register now before the QLD election. Its free and nothing is required of you, but every person who signs helps us send an even louder message to Canberra that the silent majority have numbers and we have a voice, and we intend to use it! You will be provided with information of preferred candidates and how how to vote preferencing. We won’t be screwed by Emily’s list again.

    http://www.fathers4equality-australia.org/equalparenting/f4eregistration.nsf/person?OpenForm

    [Reply]

    FREESTYLERFLYER Reply:

    This is correct although many points are addressed I say as you > Our words are all we have left to which the most powerful weapon on the planet. Show us what from man has been made without words ? Think about it!!!

    We are just sucking the planet for its blood for when it has been all dug and dusted recycled rusted busted no longer trusted. We in this generation pass for our children to grow we are not allowed to protect and hand them our now rapped planet.

    Back to back heck we need it like that does it really matter if where livin in a shack singing our own tracks while back to back bouncin ball sack what ya think about that hits ya like a bat

    Yea I just spit it out as it hits my head while like that ya cant go to bed the rhyme would be dead lost from my head

    FREESTYLERFLYER **DRIBBLE**

    [Reply]

  • bradley mckell says:

    As for being a metrosexual, feminised wanker, I’m guilty as charged.
    Cheers,
    Michael Flood.??????????????????????????????????

    Well Mr metrosexual keep the hell away from my children and everyone elses go be as feminised as you please.

    This blog is for us fathers who struggle and strain for our kids pain its people like you who send us insane. Keeping it real or as much as we can though deceptive you are clearly you really do not care for anyone child of ours.

    Get back on your horse and go take a hike and let us true fathers continue to love our children as much as we can. If you are not for us then you are against us. Without HETEROSEXUAL people mr FLOOD YOU WOULD NOT BE ALIVE.

    This year I am ready to stand FIGHT IF NEEDED to protect what is mine and love my children divine. I am here with a willing ear a tongue to let out a great big cheer or even a hand to drink a beer only to wish my children where near.

    FREESTYLERFLYER
    B. McKell

    [Reply]

  • Greg Canning says:

    Howard , do you have a citation or link for the “how to sabotage men’s rights” can’t find it on a meddling search.

    [Reply]

  • Howard Beale says:

    Flood has a long history of serial dishonesty in the name of advocacy, exploiting “victim” women and profiting from the misery & hatred he creates in the misandry industry.

    Propaganda from his personal blog infiltrated the ALP/Green Senate Report justifying this government’s underhanded repeal of shared parenting, namely, at 3.179 “we accept the findings of Dr Flood that false allegations in Family Court are rare” – yeah right, even Flood panicked at this nonsense exposure.

    It was pointed out to the Senate that Flood’s self-authored Wikipedia page (in direct violation of ethical standard) had been recommended for deletion 2 years earlier for its extremist views. This included an excerpt of Flood’s paper “How to Sabotage Men’s Rights” in which he effectively instructed women how to lie in the family court.

    Flood was discovered to be using sock puppet multiple identities to argue for his own favourable editing of his page. In fact when his outrageous dishonesty was highlighted he complained (daily) to Wikipedia that he was being victimised by his own extremist views.

    I was advised not to challenge a real live feminist man. The page has since been “normalised” from its stub status. Nevertheless the editing talk provides interesting reading at
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Michael_Flood

    The bloody mindedness of Flood’s jihadist anti-male zealotry and expectation that he can get away with it clearly identifies some sort of pathology. A PhD in why heterosexual man don’t wear condoms and whose body of work revolves around penises,sex and male violence indicates a man-child whose knees tremble and bladder weakens at the very thought of an inanimate piece of metal.

    Well and truly time this metrosexual feminized wanker’s dishonesty be exposed and taxpayer funding, our money, be stopped to the University that employs him.

    [Reply]

    Greg Canning Reply:

    Im searching for Flood’s paper “How to Sabotage Men’s Rights” right now , readers may be interested in the web of deciet being unraveled currently regarding feminist governance and input into the recent family law amendments , and whats planned under the “violence against women and THEIR children” agenda. http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/a-path-to-australian-apartheid/

    [Reply]

    Craig Minns Reply:

    The only aspect of Flood’s work whch has attracted any attention is his vilification of fathers and men generally. His academic career has been lacklustre – a slide ever further down the ladder, from ANU to Latrobe to the Wollongong Institute of Higher Education…sorry, Wollongong University, a well-known centre of research excellnce… I guess the PSU has lots of Union strings to pull down there and let’s face it, Latrobe has little room for men when there are so many female feminists being churned out by sociology departments everywhere.

    Reading that Wikipedia edit page, it seems that Flood is keen to distance himself from his own misandric views, while still seeking to capitalise on the small opportunites they represent to take advantage of his niche status as a “tame male”. If so, may I suggest a good place to start would be by retracting the more egregious claims and statements?

    It’s the intellectually honest thing to do.

    [Reply]

    Howard Beale Reply:

    Greg,
    The title is a paraphrase of a speech given by Flood and later distributed by him on countering the Father’s Rights movement. It is quoted on the Wikipedia:Talk page under “Beating the Backlash” with a link to the published article.

    [Start quote]
    The following are some of the political strategies we can use to help beat the fathers’ rights backlash.

    Discredit fathers’ rights groups. Emphasise that they;

    -Are interested only in reducing their financial obligations to their children;
    -Are interested only in extending or regaining power and authority over ex-partners and children.
    -Do nothing to increase men’s actual share of childcare / parenting or men’s positive involvement in parenting both before and after separation.
    -Collude with perpetrators of violence against women and children, protect and advocate for perpetrators, or are perpetrators.
    -Produce critiques of their lies and their strategies which are credible and accessible.
    -Co-opt the new politics of fatherhood;
    -Support positive efforts to respond to separated fathers. (And emphasise that FR groups fix men in anger and blame, rather than helping them to heal.)
    -Build on men’s desires to be involved (and nonviolent) parents.
    -Find alternative male voices: supportive men and men’s / fathers’ networks and groups.

    -`Speaking as a father…’

    Tell women’s stories

    -Atrocity tales: Stories of abuse and inequality.

    In letters, submissions, on talkback, etc.

    (But beware of the ways in which these can (a) portray women only as victims, (b) homogenise and essentialise women’s (diverse) experiences of violence, and (c) undermine credibility and support. )

    Find and nurture male allies: in government, the community sector, academic, etc.
    [end quote]

    A moderator provides 11 further citations (only a small portion) that confirm “manhate” as the cornerstone of Flood’s work. Strangely Flood tries to deny that he is the biggest asshole in the country who regularly excretes mountains of excrement that are reservoirs of some of the most pernicious viral hate memes ever to permeate Australian sociology.

    [Reply]

    Michael Flood Reply:

    Howard Beale gets a whole bunch of things wrong. In brief;
    My material on false allegations of violence and abuse came from a published journal article, not a ‘blog’, though I also summarised it for a ‘fact sheet’ I put up on the website XY.
    In relation to the Wikipedia page, I was the one who recommended it for deletion, after the page turned into hate text. But Wikipedia editors argued for its retention.
    I’ve never instructed anyone to lie in Family Court.
    I did edit the page anonymously, but did so out of naivety rather than dishonesty. More recently I’ve created a Wikipedia log-in and used this. (Yes, go read the Wikipedia discussion to see this history.)
    As for being a metrosexual, feminised wanker, I’m guilty as charged.
    Cheers,
    Michael Flood.

    [Reply]

    Anthony Priest Reply:

    Mr Flood, from my prospective and many other fair minded people you have obviously backed yourself into a corner and seem worried. You should be. Like many others I will not let this issue rest as you have shown yourself to be an academic fraud and a person of poor character who misrepresents themselves. You are full of bias and are dangerously distorted in your viewpoints regarding child welfare and custody.

    The sooner all educational institutions are made aware of this the sooner we will be able to weed out shysters like yourself. There’s is nothing naive about what you do, including your Wikipedia hack/edit, just further evidence of your dishonesty you continually proved yourself as a perpetual liar.

    I won’t be satisfied until you and people like you are totally removed from all areas dealing with child welfare matters, including any public service office, educational or any other associated capacity.

    For the record your assumptions and allegations of how men avoid their financial responsibilities and use violence to exert their authority is a perfect example of how I was treated by my spouse. I have custody of my children no thanks to people like you or the court systems or the liars that were told, but to the fact that the lifestyle of non parental care was more appealing to my ex-wife.

    A series of blunders that made any hope of being believed as to the statements of abuse impossible for any further harassment and intimidation of AVO’s being falsely placed on me. The only reason I wasn’t bashed I’m certain is due to my physical size and nothing more. The verbal and psychological abuse I received was appalling. I find in many incidences this is a reoccurring theme for many fathers, something you have strategically overlooked.

    I had a female friend who confided to me that she had been told by her legal representative to place an AVO on her partner and say that she had been physically and emotionally abused (yes she ceased to deal with them to her great credit). That’s called “integrity” you may wish to look that up because I’m sure you are not familiar with the word.

    Anyone with minimal sense would and should now realise you are not to be believed under any circumstances.

    [Reply]

  • Tony says:

    I knew Michael Flood in his early university student days and from what I can tell he hasnt changed his “direct action” (code for any means possible) to bring about radical change in Australia’s supposed misogynistic culture – Misandry is something he cant consider or contemplate because that would destroy his niche career!

    [Reply]

  • Craig Minns says:

    To quote from the original article: “In Floods’ words it is quite acceptable that “Women’s movements in Australia have had a distinctively high level of direct involvement in government policy making, with feminist bureaucrats or “femocrats” playing key roles,” ”

    Hardly surprising that Flood should feel this way, with his sister Nadine in charge of the Public Sector Union.

    I wonder how much influence she used to get him his job at Wollongong Uni after he lost the gig at Latrobe?

    [Reply]

    Michael Flood Reply:

    Craig, I don’t know where you get this stuff. I didn’t lose my job at Latrobe University, but simply moved to Wollongong University, after successfully applying for a position there.
    Readers may wish to know that I was unable to give the seminar on domestic violence and gender. I broke my shoulder mountain biking, and I was unable to travel.
    Sincerely, Michael Flood.

    [Reply]

    Craig Minns Reply:

    I’m sorry to hear of your injury, Michael. Shoulders can be very slow to heal and quite painful.

    [Reply]

  • dad2 says:

    The best outcome would be if Dr Floods (Fools) wife were to leave him and take his kids on a FALSE claim of violence.

    Imagine all the “citations” she could use to alienate him.

    Imagine hearing the little p@ssy scream bloody murder then!!!

    Anyone up for “stealing” his wife??

    [Reply]

    FREESTYLERFLYER Reply:

    Thanks for the site its great. Though how can us men stand as one with this voice for our children? What more can I do to help? Only together united can we fight this neglect of our kids.
    Cheers Brad.
    Family member and relative of the late Sir William McKell and also born same city and day as he. Check and see how close this puts me to labor.
    http://www.daff.gov.au/natural-resources/landcare/mckell/bio

    B.McKell

    [Reply]

    P Martin Reply:

    I’m waiting for the day a gang of teenage girls, all raised in the fatherless homes he has encouraged, get stuck into him the way too many of these girls are capable of doing in this day and age.

    [Reply]

  • stevphel says:

    Readers, before Michael starts to bury you with ‘facts’ from studies that support his worldview, please take a look at a couple of other links for some solid data-driven alternative views.

    http://www.saveservices.org/pdf/Seven-Facts-Every-American-Should-Know-About-DV.pdf
    http://www.498a.org/contents/dv/WomenDomesticViolence.pdf
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3002073/

    The last link was published on the (US) National Institute of Health website in 2010 and was authored by two women.They argue that feminists can no longer dispute that women are just as likely to assault a domestic partner as a man. Instead, they have tried to shift the argument to posit that the ‘lived experience’ of violence is different for women. This study finds that battered men have similar experiences to battered women.

    Michael, I would be very interested in your take on Whoopi Goldberg’s observation that the number one way to reduce domestic violence is to teach women not to assault men.

    [Reply]

  • Ash Patil says:

    Mr Flood,

    Perhaps as a gesture of how genuine your last comment to this thread is, would you be willing to issue a joint Press Release with Fathers4Equality condemning in the strongest terms the myriad of discrimination and abuse faced by men by the system and in domestic relationships?

    If you are genuine about increasing awareness of what is possibly the most under-reported crime in Australia, that being domestic abuse against men and discrimination against fathers, then this is your chance.

    We will gladly jointly author a Press Release with you highlighting the complete lack of resources afforded to men who experience domestic abuse, the overwhelming societal pressures forcing most men to keep silent about the abuses they have suffered, and the systemic abuse, denial, discrimination and criminalisation of fathers who simply want to play a role in the lives of their children.

    If you want to make a micro-dent in the balance of your public comments on family and domestic abuse, then we offer you this opportunity to show you are genuine.

    Please let me know.

    [Reply]

    stevphel Reply:

    Gotta love a good ‘put your money where your mouth is’ moment :-)

    [Reply]

    Greg Canning Reply:

    Dr Flood appears to have gone strangly quiet after that invitation Ash?

    Perhaps his claim that ” I have routinely acknowledged that violence is used by women, and I have routinely emphasised that violence of any form is unacceptable, whether by men or women.” is simply politically correct retorhic whilst his true position is
    ” what I have *not* done is to repeat the lie that domestic violence is gender-equal. ”

    and what he also has no intent of doing is addressing the violence routinely USED BY WOMEN , especially the emotional and psychological violence directed at men and children in their flagrant misuse of the divorce , domestic violence and family court industries to grow fatherlessness and paternal alienation. This is somehow not “real” violence in his view.

    Even the UN has recently been forced to acknowledge the detrimental effect fatherlessness is having on society, strange a “sociologist” can ‘t see it. http://www.articlesaboutmen.com/2011/02/fathers-recognised-as-crucial-to-family-un-report-911/

    [Reply]

    FREESTYLERFLYER Reply:

    I know alone answers I do not have though as a father much love for my children. We need advice from each other anyone with an answer? LET US ALL IN ON YOUR SECRETS PLEASE OUR KIDS NEED US NOW!!!!!!!!

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    For the record, Michael Flood did not respond to our offer for him to jointly condemn the discrimination experienced by men in this country in a press release, although he seems happy to claim credit for apparently inferring such sentiments in this blog.

    I think that it is not an exaggeration to say that Michael Flood’s reputation as as impartial social researcher is irreparably damaged given his hyper-entrenched androphobic beliefs.

    I would suggest that Michael Flood be more suited to posting his comments in white-supremist blogs, gay-hate blogs or Islamist jihaad blogs, as I am sure he would find that he has a lot more in common with these groups than he would like to admit

    [Reply]

  • Michael Flood says:

    For the record, In my writings, public speaking, and policy and program work, I have routinely acknowledged that violence is used by women, and I have routinely emphasised that violence of any form is unacceptable, whether by men or women.
    In my writings for example, way back in 1999 I acknowledged that “Some victims of domestic violence certainly are men. … some have been assaulted by women. Male victims of domestic violence deserve the same recognition, sympathy, support and services as do female victims. And they do not need to be 50 percent of the victims to deserve these”. (“Claims About Husband Battering.” DVAR: Domestic Violence Action and Resources (Domestic Violence Resource Centre) 8 (2000).) In a 2003 encyclopedia entry on domestic violence, I wrote that “Men too are subject to domestic violence at the hands of female and male sexual partners, ex-partners, and other family members.”In a 2007 encyclopedia entry on male victims of violence, I wrote that “males also are subjected to violence by female perpetrators”. (Flood, M. “Violence, Men As Victims Of.” The International Encyclopedia of Men and Masculinities (2007).)
    In my writings therefore, I have consistently acknowledged the fact that domestic violence includes violence by women against male partners. The same goes for my public speaking. I have never pretended that interpersonal violence is exclusively by men.
    I have also addressed women’s violence against men, and men’s subjection to violence more generally, in my involvements in policy and programming. For example, I facilitated a one-day workshop a few years back to help develop the work of the Service Assisting Male Survivors of Sexual Assault (SAMSSA), which supports male victims of assault by male and female perpetrators. Over 1998-2001, I participated in a Men’s Reference Group to give guidance and feedback and the development and implementation of a phoneline addressing men – both men living with domestic violence and men using violence themselves. (As a matter of interest, both these services were set up by feminist organisations. SAMSSA was auspiced by the Canberra Rape Crisis Centre, while Mensline was set up by the Domestic Violence Crisis Service.)
    More generally, I have been a keen advocate of the need to address violence against men, through op-eds and other public work. (See for example “Booze, bravado and male honour make for a culture of violence”, The Sydney Morning Herald, 23 January 2004.)
    However, what I have *not* done is to repeat the lie that domestic violence is gender-equal. I have said over and over that the victims of violence often are male, and I have noted that they are most at risk from other males. According to the recent national survey by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, twice as many men as women suffered at least one incident of violence in the last year. Among male victims of physical assault, in 94 per cent of cases their assailant was another man. Men are most at risk in public spaces, and from men they do not know. Women are most at risk in the home, and from men they know.
    In fact, male violence against other males is a key men’s health issue, or at least it should be. This violence has a significant impact on men’s health and wellbeing. And while there’s no doubt that small numbers of men do suffer significant violence at the hands of female partners or ex-partners, this has far less overall impact on men’s health than many other forms of violence. For example, in a four-year study of admissions to the Emergency Department of an American hospital, over 8,000 men had been assaulted and injured. Of these, only forty-five men were injured by their intimate female partners or ex-partners, representing 0.55 percent of male assault visits (Muelleman & Burgess 1998).
    Sincerely,
    Michael Flood.

    [Reply]

    dave aldridge. Reply:

    And what about the many men who have suffered when a woman uses a male freind or family member to beat up on a partner or former partner. Don’t tell me it doesn’t happen, i have seen it myself numerous times over the years even in my own relatively small town.Women have even been found guilty of conspiring to murder a partner or former partner using a male friend or family member to commit the crime. This of course is always seen as male on male violence but it should be named for exactly what it is DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BY A WOMAN ON A MAN, the only difference is that they are using a man as a weapon to do their dirty work instead of a gun or a knife or poison or similar.

    [Reply]

    Greg Canning Reply:

    How true Dave, these same women who want men to wear “white ribbons” and “swear” are descended from those who would hand out white feathers to males who would not sign up to be slaughtered on the battlefields of WW1. Blatant Hypocrisy then and now.

    [Reply]

    Paw Reply:

    I have to say that I am astounded at your pathetic attempt to make out that you are in some way trying to be supportive of men who suffer. You are only trying to save your questionable reputation from public scrutiny!

    Had it ever occurred to you that the overwhelming number of male victimes of DV will never put their hands up, because of the very obvious reasons of discrimination, disbelief, further abuse from disbelievers, etc, etc,. Should I go on?

    You gave some details of where you say you have spoken publicly about the facts of abuse against men, but you know, I have never seen nor heard of any of these occasions.

    Why do we only see you in the media now denouncing male victims and men’s/fathers movements?

    Why do we NEVER see you in the media, and I am referring to news media both electronic and paper, speaking of the need for policy and laws to deal with female perpetrators of DV AND child abuse?

    The only thing we ever hear of from YOU, is further abuse of men. You try to alienate men from society, with your ‘foot in each camp’ style of treachery. I cannot believe that you are actually male.

    How can you espouse to be supporting men in anyway shape or form, when it is blatantly obvious that boys/men/fathers are suffering under the hugely heavy burden of the deliberate effects of radical feminism on our society and you do and say nothing to stop this, but instead you deliberately make it worse?

    I find you a most offensive human being and at the very least, a very poor excuse for a man.

    And please, don’t come back at me saying I have anger management issues and that I am obviously an abuser and/or woman hater.

    Your stupid statements about that pathetic organisation called “Mensline”, was yet another weak attempt to prove…. God only knows what.

    As a victim of some serious domestic violence at the hands of a woman, I tried calling that mensline several times up until mid 2009. I was repeatedly told that they were not then nor were they intended to be, set up to handle male victims of domestic violence. l was told they were there to assist male perpetrators of DV. If they got a call from a man who was going to suicide, they told me they would refer them on to someone else, like DIDS.

    I am appalled that in this country it is a multi-million dollar industry to cater to the needs (and desires) of women in all levels of society and for all their problems both real and perceived.
    Yet there is virtually nothing to cater for men for any reason.

    And you know this, Mate. You know there is nothing here to aid men or boys who suffer under this huge burden that is being aided by foolish males such as yourself.

    I am no woman hater. Indeed I help many women who suffer from parental alienation, as well as I help men. Parental alienation IS a proven abuse and will one day soon, possibly in the 2013 reprint of the US DSM, be included as an illness of a parent who chooses to abuse children in this manner. And it currently has a bit more than moderate support.
    And read what I said above carefully. I did not say PAS!

    The vast majority of perpetrators of parental alienation in the developed world are mothers. This is a fact you cannot deny. Mothers do this, because in the developed world, mothers are given full custody in over 80% of cases and it is usually the custodial parents who perpetrate this abuse.

    If you want any positive reviews or stories put out about you, then start behaving like a man (a real man) and start being truthful and stop telling lies yourself.

    Like your statement that equal DV between men and women is a lie.
    Only an idiot would say such a thing.

    If you have studied sociology like you claim to have done, then you will know the dynamics that exist to cause men to keep this abuse to themselves, which is why reported and surveyed numbers simply are not there to be counted.

    [Reply]

    stevphel Reply:

    Well said, Paw!

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Mr Michael Flood, is this supposed to be an apology or a rewriting of history?

    You have to accept that you have been one of the major protagonists in this country against the recognition of abuse against males.

    Referring to a few footnotes you may have written doesn’t undo the enormous damage you have created.

    Until you stop living in denial to the abuse that YOU have been responsible for, postings like these will be dismissed as a transparent public relations exercise, designed to counter the overwhelming reputation you have acquired as an unethical lobbyist masquerading as a sociologist.

    [Reply]

  • Greg Canning says:

    I finally received a reply on behalf of the Vice Chancellor at JCU

    Dear Dr Canning
    First of all my apologies for not responding sooner to your email. The Vice Chancellor has asked that I do so on her behalf.
    The email of November 8 that you refer to is an example of the twice weekly update sent to the whole JCU community pointing to the latest items on the @JCU website, the University’s electronic newsletter.

    As you will have noticed the email says:
    @JCU is updated daily. The listings below are just some of the latest highlights. Visit http://www-public.jcu.edu.au/atjcu/index.htm regularly for new additions. If you’d like us to include a listing, please email it to communications@jcu.edu.au

    On the website there is far more detail about the particular event you refer to including the flyer noting that this is being presented by the Queensland Centre for Domestic and Family Violence Research from CQU’s Mackay campus and is being video-linked to 10 other sites in Queensland, as well as Sydney and Melbourne, and including JCU.

    It was not an invitation to attend the Flood seminar nor for that matter the “Creative Commons and You” event which was also mentioned in that particular email, but rather both were posted as a matter of information for anyone who is interested, similar to many of the other items on the @JCU website.

    While I am not in a position to be able to comment on whether Dr Flood’s views are in anyway biased or that the seminar will only reflect such a bias, I do note that the presentation is to be followed by a discussion and questions period. The flyer also says the seminar is:
    Assessing debates regarding men’s and women’s experiences of domestic violence
    Do men and women use violence against each other at similar rates and with similar effects? Debates over men’s and women’s domestic and family violence are increasingly prominent, in local communities, programming and policy, and research. Domestic violence long has been understood to be a problem largely of violence by men, against women and children. Now however, emphases on women’s domestic violence against men and on domestic violence as gender-equal are increasingly visible. This presentation assesses these debates, in two ways. First, Dr Flood provides a comprehensive outline of contemporary scholarship on the character of men’s and women’s experiences of violence perpetration and victimisation. Second, he assesses the political character and agendas of those groups involved in advocating for a gender-equal approach to domestic violence.

    Many issues involve divergent views and I do not believe it is @JCU’s role to censor – with some obvious exceptions – the fact that an event, seminar, lecture is occurring.
    Regards

    Jim O’Brien
    Director Media and Communications

    James Cook University
    Townsville

    Will add my response separately

    [Reply]

    Greg Canning Reply:

    Dear Jim,

    Thank you for taking the time to reply to my enquiry.

    As the “Director Media and Communications” at JCU, I know that you understand the intent of broadcast emails directing readers to content on an internet notice board, is indeed advertising for and promotion of that content. The linked flyer for the CQU Queensland Centre for Domestic and Family Violence Research Seminar by Dr Michael Flood, is an unrestricted invitation to join this seminar via interactive video link, and hence the emil in question can be seen as directing the “whole JCU community” to the invitation for that event, and your assertion that “it was not an invitation” is one of semantics, rather than reality.

    Whilst you may not be in a position to comment on Dr Flood’s biases, I am well aware of his track record of holding outdated and discredited “Duluth informed” views on domestic violence, and his use of these same views to try and silence opposition from pro family and pro father groups in the debate around domestic violence, and family law in Australia. The attention of the Vice Chancellor was drawn to Dr Floods 2010 article published in the journal Violence Against Women, and I attach a copy of that article and my critique of it for your information. The content of this article mirrors the topic of the forthcoming seminar, and whilst I of course cannot predict what the content of the seminar will be, it is not illogical to conclude that Dr Flood will follow his already well know stance and present material from his published works.

    You conclude your response with the statement:

    “Many issues involve divergent views and I do not believe it is @JCU’s role to censor – with some obvious exceptions – the fact that an event, seminar, lecture is occurring.”

    I would be grateful if you could advise me what sort of material would be an “obvious exception,” and indeed weather JCU has a policy that guides you in judging what materials are appropriate? If so I would be grateful if you could direct me to that policy.

    Would for example material that advocates breaching the Constitution of Australia, The Sex Discrimination Act, The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights be considered an obvious exemption? Would material that sacrifices intellectual rigour and honesty for the promotion of extremist ideology be considered an obvious exemption as Dr Floods views arguably do all of these thing.

    Finally I have suggested neither that the advertisement be censored or the seminar not presented, but rather that there should be a counterbalancing, with presentation of the opposing point of view. If I were not planning to be overseas I would have registered to attend, but an audience attendee cannot be expected to present the whole opposite view point.

    The reality is it would be more appropriate if a seminar titled “Assessing debates regarding men’s and women’s experiences of domestic violence” as well as having an ideologue who believes the only “real” violence is “violence against women” , had a countering presentation from an advocate for the male victims of domestic violence, knowledgeable of how false accusations are enabled by the domestic abuse industry, and accepted without question by the legal system to bring about the bias seen in family court rulings regarding residency and contact, leaving a growing number of Australian children essentially in the unenviable and socially disadvantaged position of being “fatherless” .

    With good wishes

    Dr Greg Canning

    I like the idea of a complaint to the Wolloongong Uni research ethics committee!

    [Reply]

    Howard Beale Reply:

    I think this quote sums up the work of the “good” Doctor:

    “Fathers’ rights groups also attack media and community campaigns focused on men’s violence against women, call for the de-funding and abolition of what they call the “domestic violence industry”

    Dr Flood has a highly paid, comfortable job in the bludgeocracy producing material to support the notion of female victimhood that is at the heart of the feminist gravy train.

    He realises this funding will be threatened by an outbreak of the truth, or indeed common sense.

    To put it simply it is in Dr Flood’s personal financial interest to write this filth.

    As always…follow the money.

    [Reply]

  • stevphel says:

    Michael Flood is a lecturer in sociology at the University of Wollongong. Part of his legitimacy as a feminist writer is derived from his university position. If I were the Vice Chancellor of the university I would be *seriously* concerned that his admission of unethical behavior has harmed (or could potentially) harm the reputation of the university.

    Indeed, one could argue that his demonstrated ideological position and the (admitted) fraudulent misrepresentation of his opponents ‘ position probably breaches some ethical guidelines for his existing research projects.

    I draw the group’s attention to the University’s Human Research Ethics Committee…http://www.uow.edu.au/research/ethics/UOW009375.html

    I urge members of the group in Australia to file official complaints to this committee and then to the Vice Chancellor. At the very least, his work deserves censure and close supervision moving forward.

    UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG POLICY
    Any individual or organisation may initiate complaints about research involving human participants by making a written complaint to the Secretary, HREC, who will act as the Complaints Officer. These complaints may address:

    .Research being conducted in a way which the complainant believes to be unethical or contrary to existing policy or legislation;
    .Research (involving human participants) being conducted without formal HREC approval;
    .Research being conducted in manner contrary to the conditions placed on the research in the letter of approval from the HREC;
    .Research being conducted in a manner contrary to an HREC application which has been approved;
    .Violation or compromise of confidentiality in recruitment, conduct and publication of research;
    .Misuse of data;
    .Any other similar matter.
    The University’s Complaints Policy only covers complaints where the complainant identifies him or herself. Anonymous complaints received by the Complaints Officer will be filed, but will not be investigated.

    Complaint Procedure
    On receiving a complaint, the Complaints Officer or the Chair of the HREC may, in light of the information contained in the complaint;

    .Inform the researcher and /or the researchers supervisor of the complaint and seek information in response to the complaint;
    .Seek an explanation of the events which have given rise to the complaint;
    .Suspend HREC approval while the matter is investigated;
    .Request evidence that the researcher is conducting the research in keeping with the terms of the HREC approval;
    .Place further conditions on the continued conduct of the research;
    .Require that all or some data be brought to the Complaints Officer for secure storage;
    .Approach the Pro Vice Chancellor (Research) to inform him/her of the complaint;
    .Recommend further investigation of the complaint by the Pro Vice Chancellor (Research);
    After full investigation, revoke approval for the research and require that all data that has been collected be bought to the Complaints Officer for secure storage.
    Complainants and researchers (and supervisors where the research is student research) will receive a written response to the complaint from the Complaints Officer on behalf of the HREC. Where the nature of the complaint requires further investigation, researchers will receive written information about the process being undertaken.

    Researchers who believe that a complaint is unwarranted or that the handling of the complaint is unfair are entitled to lodge a formal complaint or appeal to the Vice Chancellor.

    actions have the

    [Reply]

  • Anthony Priest says:

    Yet another example of the so called educated running the agenda. Michael Flood using outdated reports and referencing his own material, and worst of all mainly pure conjecture and personal opinion to run a anti-fathers campaign. How this unethical man even had any of his reports peer reviewed without being consigned to the waste bin only reflects very poorly on the institutions that bestowed a doctorate on him. What a grub.

    Men keep voicing your opinion and fighting for your rights against any that would remove yours and your children’s rights to have a real and effective male presence in their lives. In the recent month it has become apparent that the Judiciary and Government have no real intention of equity or justice and in my view now hold little or my respect for their office of authority. When one can lie and cheat and not be held accountable then the whole of the system is proved to be corrupt and needed to be abolished completely.

    Those supposedly serving the people of this country who have made it increasingly difficult if not impossible for fathers to have equal rights in this country should hold their heads in shame. I for one will be voting and actively campaigning against this government and offering support to any individual candidate or party who offers true fair and equitable rights.

    [Reply]

  • Howard Beale says:

    Senate to vote on Family Violence Bill vote (tomorrow) Tuesday 22 November 2011. #3 of 6

    [Reply]

  • Howard Beale says:

    PROPAGANDA ALERT – Punch Magazine (again)

    “The High Price of Male Silence on Violence Against Women”

    - “I spoke to Dr Flood last week and he is no way some politically correct hand-wringer, some self-loathing bloke who thinks we’re all beasts and bastards… The research which Dr Flood will release next Friday is more of a call to action, in that it looks at the types of things blokes can do to speak up and act against violence.
    [Next Friday is White Ribbon Day - the publicity of which almost certainly trigger the Family Violence Bill being voted]

    http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/the-high-price-of-male-silence-on-violence-against-women/

    Propaganda preceding vote next week on the Family Law Bill – Gillard’s “Hate Men” laws which take “he said” out of “he said, she said” and remove all penalties for lying. Dr Michael Flood is the antithesis of fairness and sexual equality, a dinosaur of ’70s radical feminism exploiting “victim” women for his own personal profit. He is Australia’s #1 pro-feminist manhater whose submission to the Senate “false allegations are rare in the family court” with the corollary that men denying allegations is another form of abuse on women is the basis for Family Law amendments which efectively removes the presumption of innocence for men and legalises perjury – women must be believed.

    We know from the USA these “dangerous” laws don’t work, make shared parenting impossible, cause 40% of children to be fatherless, costs taxpayers $billions thrown away on massive welfare increases, mass criminalisation, incarceration and impoverishment of men and a Pandora’s box of personal and social pathologies directly asociated with mass fatherlessness – crime, substance abuse, mental health, unemployment, gangs, teenage pregancy – which in turn create generational family violence and abuse in a self-perpetuating cycle. Flood, dangerous anachronistic hater that he is, serves as the useful “academic” idiot

    Comment at Punch and Punch on Facebook

    [Reply]

    Howard Beale Reply:

    Use this to “Express Your Outrage at Gillard’s “Hate Men” Laws” at
    http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=193041320777603

    [Reply]

  • John Lacazi says:

    This is not the first time Michael Flood has been accused of mis-leading and unethical behaviour.

    He actively and openly encourages the sabotage and mis-represention of father groups by women, as being a illegitimate tactic in support of women’s rights.

    The fact that this kind of deception is more at home in China or Syria seems to escape him. Its certainly is not the kind of action that a democracy would advocate.

    In Australia we should be debating the truth, not encouraging one gender to lie about the other.

    Michael Flood is a stench on an otherwise important social debate.

    [Reply]

  • Michael Flood says:

    The account above of my use of a fathers’ rights broadcast email service isn’t quite accurate. The circumstances were this. I was monitoring a fathers’ rights website, Dads On The Air, and sometimes participating in debate on that list. People on that list had set up a broadcast email service, to send messages to all parliamentarians. I took advantage of this, sending a message which was opposed to fathers’ rights agendas. This of course was obvious to the people who’d set it up, and they criticised my use.
    However, the above account gets several things wrong. I did not misrepresent myself: First, I never claimed to be a separated father. I can’t remember if I signed the message I sent (although I usually do), but I certainly did not make false claims about myself. Second, I acknowledged my use of the ‘Megaphone’ service as soon as I was challenged about it, rather than denying it as claimed above.

    Still, I agree that my use of the email service wasn’t appropriate. As I wrote on the Dads On The Air list at the time, “It’s true, I did try to (mis)use the Megaphone to send that message. I’m somewhat embarrassed about this though. I did it on the spur of the moment, but I can see on reflection that doing so contradicts the ethics with which I try to conduct my participation in public debates etc. Namely, I try to;
    Conduct myself in a transparent and above-board manner;
    Deal with others in respectful and cordial ways;
    Refrain from personal attacks.
    These are certainly the ways in which I try to conduct myself on the DOTA Forum, and in any public debate.
    Using the Megaphone to send that message doesn’t fit with the first of these principles, and clearly was using the Megaphone for a purpose directly contrary to that for which it was intended. So, I *apologise* for this action.”
    If the poster above is saying that people engaged in political debate and advocacy should conduct themselves in transparent and ethical ways, then I agree. I hope that you will apply these same high standards to those fathers’ rights activists who make threats of violence, make extreme and defamatory accusations, and seek to threaten the employment and livelihood of individuals with whom they disagree. I’ve been subjected to all of these unethical actions.
    Sincerely,
    Michael Flood.

    [Reply]

    Michael Flood Reply:

    I’ve checked, and I was transparent at least about my identity in the message I sent. See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sharedparenting/message/18980. Given that I gave my name and full contact details at the bottom of my message on the ‘Megaphone’.
    I’m not particularly defending my use of the email list for a purpose opposite to what was intended, but I do want you at least to get the facts straight.
    Sincerely,
    Michael Flood.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Mr Michael Flood,

    There was more than one email message.

    From our recollection, a cluster of emails from the same IP address and identical PC settings came under different names, with different comments, over a number of days.

    In any case this is irrelevant given that we all agree with your admission that your conduct was unethical.

    This admission by you should label all of your work on gender policies as compromised, given your entrenched preconceptions, and your inability to be even remotely objective about this topic.

    I suspect that your extremist beliefs perhaps say a lot more about your own ‘hidden secrets’ than they do about men in general.

    Whatever your motivations, people like you do more harm than good in gender relations. You harm the welfare and prospects of both women and men in this country by oversimplifying social dynamics.

    By vilifying one gender and idealizing the other, you may be promoting a narrative that is all too quickly taken up by those who wish to exploit it for their own political mileage, but your efforts do not and never will reduce the incidence of family violence in this country.

    That kind of achievement will be left to the more genuine, balanced and capable social researchers who see sociology as a diligent and objective science, not as a lobbying tool for the dissemination of mis-information and hate ideologies.

    [Reply]

    Howard Beale Reply:

    “I did it on the spur of the moment,”…
    With respect Michael it is difficult to accept that 500 words of cogent argument in itemised paragraphs with hyperlinked references was just a slip of the finger.… Are you just smoking or graduated to injecting the substance?

    And how does signing your name as a man differentiate it from being a separated father?

    Further, misquoting the name of the University, in the context of the author referring to your seminar at that University, is not “inventing” facts nor does it mitigate your behaviour.

    Now can you please explain your findings that “false allegations are rare in the family court” and its corollary that men denying allegations is actually another form of female abuse.

    And will you retract what is possibly the most egregiously incorrect finding written in social science in Australia, ever.

    I believe there are criminal penalties for misleading the Senate and possible civil litigation for the sex discrimination self-evident in your publication. Can’t imagine your University or sponsors will be happy about being so exposed.

    [Reply]

  • Greg Canning says:

    Part of a letter I have written to the JCU VC, and others ,

    “My concern is that whilst the seminar title might suggest he intends to present an impartial overview of the field, Dr Flood is well known to hold views at one polar extreme of the debate around this issue. I am also concerned at the targeting of students from disciplines outside the social sciences where it might be perceived that the seminar is in fact offering some type of community education rather than presenting an extremist view.

    Whilst I will happily admit that my views as a male victim of DV and of false allegations of DV are polarised to the other extreme, I don’t believe either view should be advocated broadly to students, without moderation or counter balancing of arguments. I would see this as indoctrination rather than education. ”

    Its a propaganda war in which one party holds enormous resources and is government backs, The more of us who speak out when we see this in our local communities the greater will be our visibility. Something which apparently as demonstrated in this article has them worried. Now , letter to the local media……

    [Reply]

    Paw Reply:

    Great letter Greg.

    Don’t know where you are, but I have tried getting these sorts of letters in the local media and they simply refuse to print anything that is remotely pro-father. So best of luck with that one.

    The unfortunate thing, is that there are losts of Floods around, both male and female. They are empty vessels with very little substance and have to ride on the back of some other animal like a parasite, so they can make their living/dollars. Flood is just like this. He cannot survive in the real world, but his greed has seen that there is money to be made in the industry of father hating.

    Join the girlie man hating brigade and you have a guaranteed income. Heck, just ask a lawyer.

    [Reply]

  • Paw says:

    Great piece of work by Greg Canning.

    And it is good to see an article written by someone who has the courage to publicly detail the bad and evil behaviour of all these lunatics. From the nasty radical feminists, to the spineless Flood, all the way to the tens of thousands of vicious rotten women who use the system to destroy men, but choose innocent children as their weapon.

    Oh for the day when fathers and family groups finally wake up and decide to take feminists and women head-on in the public arena. This is where the battle front is going to be, if anyone wants to see any changes in family law or criminal law, or indeed any changes in the social structure of our once great nation, because men are treated with disdain in all levels of society.

    This feminist invented so-called ‘Patriarchy’, which by the way does not exist, is the tool with which they use as leverage in govt to have laws changed to suit their lust filled desire to destroy men.
    The pity is that they have convinced the vast majority of women in this country, who now think like them to varying degrees.

    If or when the day ever comes that women in Australia finally wake up to the fact that they have been hoodwinked, the feminists will be sent packing from our shores and laws will finally be changed to represent gender neutral policy where everyone is treated equally before the law and children’s rights to both parents are set in stone.

    Until that day comes, nothing will change and our current situation will only get worse. Especially when we have turncoats like Floody running around trying to keep his mistresses happy, by throwing stones at all the men out there in society.

    I shake my head in disbelief!

    [Reply]

    zac Reply:

    Barack Obama’s inspiring speach to the Australian parliament touched on common (U.S. / Australia) values of freedom of speech, rights to protest and unsung heroes fighting for ‘just’ change in many discrete areas. The address is well worth a listen and our M.Ps and P.M. should replay it once again and absorb it as a landmark oration.

    Only peaceful protest (such as the ‘occupy’ movement expounds) by fathers/mens groups will gain positive notice of the ‘majority’ of the voting public who will THEN demand change to unjust rules regarding men’s/father’s eroded rights.

    It may take our children, as voting adults, to change some of the demonic, family crushing legislation that has crept into our society at the hands of the Family Law junket. (Industry)

    Can we ever change this? As Barack once said, “Yes we can”

    [Reply]

    zac Reply:

    “….because when societies harness the potential of all their citizens, these societies are more successful, they are more prosperous and they are more just.”

    “History is on the side of the free-free societies, free governments, free economies, free people….”

    from Barack Obama’s address to the Australian Parliament 17/11/ 2011

    [Reply]

Leave Comment

*

Subscribe to Fathers4Equality Email for Updates