Loving dad's year of torment

[4th law of robotics]

Some 300 people are enjoying hot summer days at McKee Domain near Ruby Bay as a father is at the playground with his daughters.

It is a classic Kiwi setting, with happy campers, barbecues and children playing.

Then comes something out of place, a police constable asking questions. The idyllic illusion is shattered.

Strangers claim to have seen the man, in broad daylight, behaving inappropriately with a girl.

The campers report this to the reserve caretaker who informs the police.

The allegations include kissing, rubbing her bottom and allowing the 10-year-old to rub his thigh and chest.

The flabbergasted man says he didn't do anything wrong, the daughter named as his victim says he didn't, and his wife says he didn't.

They cannot be identified for legal reasons although they would be happy to be.

The father said even as the constable questioned him at the campground, one of the three daughters jumped up and kissed him, and poked her finger through a small hole in his shirt saying "tickle, tickle".

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7903165/Loving-dads-year-of-torment

Is there any chance a mother would be the center of a year long investigation, a trial and so forth for playing with her child in public? Of course not. The very notion is absurd.

Which makes this yet another example of how the Patriarchy is willing to dedicate more money and resources to addressing male issues than women's issues. A woman would have simply been ignored. As if she weren't a real person or that her crimes didn't matter. Whereas the Patriarchy happily dedicates vast resources to the issue when men are involved because that's all the Patriarchy cares about. There's even a fair chance this guy could have been given free housing and food for the next 10-20 years, courtesy of the Patriarchy.

I say it's time for this unfair allocation of resources to end!

[Warren DeMontague]

1. There was a blogger who got outraged over dads at her kids preschool helping their own daughters

Use the bathroom.



Yes, men should absolutely be caregivers for their kids, and be willing to take on parental duties as women work, etc....

But the minute a MAN goes into a bathroom with his 3 yr old daughter to help her go... ZOMG ZOMG O NO PERVERRRRT ALERT!!!!

And yes, I blame these circles (and yes, they seem to have more audience in England, and Australia, for some odd reason) that have spent the past 20 years painting everyone with a y chromosome as the all purpose scary penis boogeyman.

Remember the brou ha ha over the airline that was requiring men to change seats rather than sit next to unaccompanied minors? ...man, the collective blame-a-trons and "but teh menzzz deserve it" crowd came out of the fucking WOODWORK in those threads. There is no group- i dont care if they're a minority, majority, historically disadvantaged or advantaged- that such statements would be acceptable about, except men.

[4th law of robotics]

2. The 'all men are predators, even the fathers'meme pairs nicely

with the 'why are there so few male caretakers' meme.

If you help raise this kid you're a pedo. If you don't you're a deadbeat.

Yet another male privilege: no matter what we do we're the center of attention.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

3. Ugh, the reminder about the airline thread

A true low point for certain sectors around here, the argument being that all children are victims, or potential victims of some man who can't keep it in his shorts.

[4th law of robotics]

4. You mean these:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021139684

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021130802

[Warren DeMontague]

5. You know what finally turned that fucking noise off?

2 things.

One) I pointed out that other airlines now want to make families pay more just so they can sit with their OWN kids, and

Two) (this was the kicker) I reminded everyone that once the dreaded men were scooted away from the unaccompanied minors, who would be left to be drafted as the de facto traveling companions for these kids? That's right, adult women flyers. "Here you go, ladies! We know you're safe, why don't you watch over the stranger's 10 year old we've plopped you next to! You won't mind, womanly caregiving natural nurturer that you are!"

Um. Ah. Well. Ah. Um. Ahhh.



*crickets*

[4th law of robotics]

6. An important lesson:

If you want discrimination against men to be addressed find a way to spin it as discrimination against women.

Slurs against gay men were ignored mostly until someone figured out that implying that they are effeminate was insulting to women. Now such slurs get you instabanned.

Rape killed about men aren't a problem except that it normalizes rape which hurts women.

And so on. Men can't have issues of their own, but rather those issues must be weighed against the best interests of women and often children.

On issues affecting men people will ask how addressing them will affect women. Never the other way around.

Privilege.

[Major Nikon]

7. It was stupid to begin with

An airline seat is one of the safest places on earth you can put your kids.

[Warren DeMontague]

8. It was really about "Let's remind the world that every MAN is a seething cauldron of potential

penis peril" ... but, again, it wasn't real well thought through, because if you're gonna move the men around the plane, you're making the women sit next to the kids.

Erk.. oops..