A self-censored chronicle of family court dramas, lived by parents who lost all or some visitation with or custody of a child or children based on perjury and/or other false courtroom evidence
The timing for the unpublishing could not be any worse for the group, as they are now unable to publish post-conference articles and summaries of the event. It may have just be a coincidence, but a coordinated mass reporting operation could also have been the cause – so far, no group has come forward to take responsibility for the removal of the page.
After having amassed around 35,000 likes on the social media platform, the page was deleted for having “violated community standards” – it was not revealed what exact regulation was violated, and Elam was adamant that they had done nothing wrong.
Speaking to a crowd at the International Conference on Men’s Issues in the ExCel Centre in London, Paul Elam revealed that the Facebook page for “A Voice For Men,” one of the organizing groups for the event, has been unpublished by the social network on the second day of the conference.
This follows a series of other conservative, right-leaning, or otherwise anti-social justice or “offensive” pages being unpublished by Facebook.The Meninist page was removed this week, with the eventual reason given being that their profile photo somehow violated standards that the website had set, even after the administrators of the page had removed all of their content as a defense against such action from the company.
Lucian Valsan, European News Director for AVfM, said to Breitbart News that, “the closure was highly expected, considering the Marxist and feminist domination within Facebook [itself]. The move to remove men’s rights and anti-feminist groups from Facebook has been going on for two years now, so therefore it is consistent with their policy!”
William Vaughan, a conference attendee, said that “it is terrible to have anyone in principle excluded from something which is essentially a mass communications tool analogous to the telephone network, as it cuts off contact with members of the different groups.”
byJACK HADFIELD — Jack Hadfield is a student at the University of Warwick and a regular contributor to Breitbart Tech. You can follow him on Twitter here: @ToryBastard_.
Children thrive when they are meaningfully connected to both parents.
A legal presumption of 50/50 shared parenting—when both parents are fit and there is no abuse—best serves children’s emotional, psychological, and developmental needs.
This is not about parental rights over children.
It is about children’s rights to both parents.
Why 50/50 Shared Parenting Should Be the Standard
1. Children Need Both Parents—Consistently
Extensive research shows that children with substantial time and involvement from both parents experience:
Better emotional regulation and mental health
Higher academic achievement
Stronger identity formation
Lower rates of anxiety, depression, and risky behavior
Children do best when neither parent is reduced to a visitor.
2. Equal Parenting Reduces Conflict
Contrary to common belief, shared parenting lowers post-separation conflict by:
Removing incentives to “win” custody
Encouraging cooperation and accountability
Reducing litigation and court overload
When courts start from fairness, parents are more likely to act fairly.
3. Gender Neutrality Promotes True Equality
Children benefit when parenting laws:
Treat mothers and fathers as equally capable
Reflect modern caregiving realities
Eliminate outdated assumptions and bias
Equality in parenting strengthens equality in society.
4. Long-Term Outcomes Improve for Everyone
Shared parenting is linked to:
Stronger lifelong parent–child bonds
Better co-parenting relationships
Improved child outcomes well into adulthood
Reduced social and economic costs tied to family breakdown
This is preventive public policy, not just family law.
Important Safeguards
A 50/50 standard must include clear exceptions:
Documented abuse or neglect
Serious substance abuse or untreated mental illness
Situations where shared parenting would clearly harm the child
Safety always comes first.
But absence of conflict or imperfection is not a requirement for parenting.
The Principle Is Simple
When both parents are fit and loving, children deserve both—fully, consistently, and without bias.
Make 50/50 shared parenting the starting point, not the uphill battle.
At the core of it all; it is Human Rights. Fathers... Mothers... Both Human beings. A child born is a Human created... that Human being created from a Father and Mother is going to be here long after breast feeding and long after its first few years of tender care. The psychological effects of gestation and giving birth are something that a Male parent cannot understand. This is not a fault or weakness, it is not permission to be treated with less Rights in Parenting.
A baby is born... Parents are created at this moment too. That creation process (when parents are born) is special and important. Human rights are linked to every aspect of Parenting. To write any laws to reflect gender preference is to define WHICH parent receives more parenting rights. This is NOT a construct of Equality, it is the construct of social engineering. Culture is evolving and law is progressive. Acceptance of Equality Practice of Equality Enforcement of Equality
Of course there is people who stand in the way of Progression and Changes in Culture.
The fight is not simply your case... That is your personal battle... and it is extremely important because when you stand up for your rights not just as a father, but as a Human being and Parent. You are taking a stand in society and showing people that you are not branding yourself in the image that society has cast shadows onto. Fatherhood... As a 'Father' you might have strength, but in court or to Mothers, you might simply trigger stereotypes on a mental & Emotional level. As a ' Parent ' you are Equal. As a Human you are Equal.
If you have read finalized court documents you might notice that words can define you. We all know that words are not truly what defines who you are, ...but on paper... to the courts... Words can limit your Human Rights. Stigma and Public Opinion are either enemies or valiant defenders of your case. Fight for your cause! and when you do, do it as a Human being fighting for Equal rights as a Parent.
Write your state reps and Write about this. Whatever wrongs have been inflicted against you, writing the state and your government about Equal rights for Parents (leaving gender descriptive words to a minimum or out completely) is the first steps in shifting culture and society into a more Equal and positive future for all parents. Imagine all the young parents who will come after us... We need to stand together and we will be stronger for it.
What is more precious: your 14th amendment, basic human right to parent your children or your 2nd amendment right to bear arms? If you had to lose one, which would it be?
“Only lawyers win in the divorce” is the mantra from which Family Law Statues where written under the false banner of a “child’s best interest.” The lack of a presumptive 50/50 Shared Parenting standard continues to make the divorce industry flourish while children’s lives lay in the ruin.
By creating this 50/50 Shared Parenting standard, our children and parents will be protected from an industry that creates, promotes and perpetuates conflict for its financial gain. Lives are ruined, lives are lost and injustices beyond comprehension as children are alienated from their parents.
The presumptive 50/50 Shared Parenting standard is based on an absence of a preponderance of evidence supporting abuse, neglect, addiction or other serious issue as defined by a Court. This fact-based and objective-based approach has to replace the hearsay and subjectively corrupt manner of today's family court processes.
Given us this single standard can reduce the amount of divorce litigation by half and allow families to move forward with the best interest of all in mind. Help protect parental rights as strongly as gun rights.
It is your duty to introduce legislation establishing a presumptive 50/50 Shared Parenting standard and protect our divorcing families from being exploited by an industry for its own greed.
Sincerely,
[Your name]
Remain an Equal Parent to your Child!
We only support organizations who show an understanding that children need both parents, and that either parent is equally capable of the choice to perpetrate hate or declare peace.
I wish you well and hope you know that your not at all alone.
Life can give us skills whether we want them or not. In time, every father facing custody and court cases involving family law will develop a 'thicker skin' as we all know that nothing is more personal then an attack against your human rights, your rights as a parent and your ability to parent a child.
I would like to express a very important concept today.
This is extremely bold and progressive. I believe their is no 'movements' in the world today to change the opinion of culture in the way that will actually build up momentum.
I would like to give you an example*, Equality for homosexual relationships in the USA have become popular.*The example is not aimed to defame or harm homosexual couples in any way, simply a random example.
Single Male parents seeking Equality in Custody and Family law is NOT.
Who do you believe will be the first to win Public approval in the equality of raising children?
A large portion of Society will back gay rights to have two males or two females raise a child... Will Society recognize the human rights of a Male parent to have ABSOLUTE EQUALITY in custody decisions or family court?
The reason behind this is because Gay rights do not threaten the power of women as much as the concept of ' MAN VS WOMAN '
Justice is a concept of moral rightness based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, religion, equity or fairness, as well as the administration of the law, taking into account the inalienable and inborn rights of all human beings and citizens, the right of all people and individuals to equal protection before the law of their civil rights, without discrimination on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, color, ethnicity, religion, disability, age, or other characteristics, and is further regarded as being inclusive of social justice.
An important distinction worthy of mention is that most of the members of the children’s and fathers' rights movement had little prior interest in the law or politics. However, as they felt that their goal of equal shared parenting was being frustrated by the family courts, many took an interest in family law, including but not limited to child custody and child support. The movement includes women as well as men, often the second wives of divorced fathers or other family members of men who have had some engagement with family law. Though it has been described as a social movement, members of the movement believe their actions are better described as part of a civil rights movement.
Objections to the
characterizations of the movement as a social movement are related to the
belief that discrimination against fathers moves beyond the social sciences and
originates in government intervention into family life. The movement has
received international press coverage as a result of high profile activism of
their members, has become increasingly vocal, visible and organized, and has
played a powerful role in family law debates.
In Prince v. Commonwealth
of Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944) ~
"It is cardinal with us that the custody, care and nurture of the
child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include
preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder.... It is
in recognition of this that these decisions have respected the private realm of
family life which the state cannot enter."Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the government has broad authority to regulate the actions and treatment of children. Parental authority is not absolute and can be permissibly restricted if doing so is in the interests of a child's welfare. While children share many of the rights of adults, they face different potential harms from similar activities.
In Troxel v. Granville,
530 U.S. 57 (2000) ~ "The Due Process Clause does not permit a State to
infringe on the fundamental right of parents to make child-rearing decisions
simply because a state judge believes a 'better' decision could be made."Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000),[1] was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States, citing a constitutional right of parents to rear their children, struck down a Washington state law that allowed any third party to petition state courts for child visitation rights over parental objections.
We only support organizations who show an understanding that children need both parents, and that either parent is equally capable of the choice to perpetrate hate or declare peace.