It's interesting that we celebrate Susan B. Anthony, here in America, as being this famous suffragette. But did they teach us in school that she only wanted white women to get the vote and she was vehemently opposed to women of color having that same right extended to them?????

Actually in many cases in the USA woman have more rights than me and more opportunities. The truth is if anyone is holding them back it's not men it's themselves.

Please explain what is meant by the equal representation for woman quote. Is it equal cops, doctors scientists, garbage women , bridge builders, How is this equal ideology pan out in reality until woman truly have no more to gripe about. It never will ... you are hardwired to never be totally content with your lot. Hail the suffragettes and the 60 s and 70s 2 nd wave, they burnt the bra and guys got laid a lot more with the free love thing. But current year .. woman can do and be whatever they want. Stop putting imaginary hurdles in their way. It’s unessasary..

So you are supportive of terrorism for political gains? Suffragettes blew stuff up for the vote when they could have gained it peacefully like other countries.

We have a remarkable parallel history here in America. Even the long way to go part. Keep marching and making lots of noise, men will have to listen...

Bullshit.

I think men too have played a role in this achievement, when will they be saluted too?

Hmmm...

Yup women suffrage is worthy of celebration. Part of a long and noble struggle.

The idea that in some areas women have more rights than men is just tosh. Its just that in a legal system made for and by men, women are assumed to be mothers and care givers. Occasionally that is going to back fire against some men.
Personally I was brought up by a single parent FATHER in the 1960's. I then became a single parent father myself and brought up 2 lovely children. (Best time of my life )
It wasnt the law that was stacked against me but, sure, a male dominated society made it harder than it need be sometimes.
Anyhow let's not digress
Women's Suffrage an important moment for people in this country and definitely worth stopping for a moment to thank them for their efforts

I totally agree and applaud (as a fellow Briton) these people, William Wilberforce and John Newton (author of Amazing Grace) deserve it too and the latter is so overlooked.

Please excuse my vehemence on the next part which has its origins in feeling and not personal spite towards your good self.

Women have MORE rights than men in the UK where it counts and it stinks, take for example child custody laws. The whole courts are BIASED against men. Women can freely use their child as an emotional weapon against their ex and get away with it. Women can often get away with abusing their kids and after a period of time the social services usually give them back to her. This is further exasperated when judges and the courts ALWAYS favour the mother even if she is a dole-walling low-life scumbag!

No wonder organisations such as fathers 4 justice are about.

Let me tell you a case:

My ex who I asked to leave our home as she was going out drinking all night/shagging other men and coming home hung over and I was WORKING all day and holding the family together. During the weekends she would lay in bed all day whilst I was doing all the needed stuff to take care of a baby, change nappies, cook food for her other child (my step son at the time)
This woman has NEVER had a job-even when she originally lived in the USA.

The judge (after a SIX year high-court custody battle) said that although I commend you Sir for your acts and responsibility I can only award 50% custody to you as you will have to employ the use of "before and after school clubs" whilst you work and that he could spend more of his time with his mother. SO whilst the custody is 50/50 the residency is with her.

Yet this cow was drunk most of the time and has never had a job?

The same scenario happens all the time in the UK
[lawgazette.co.uk]

Bob Geldof weights in too
[fnf.org.uk]
[telegraph.co.uk]

Message from Bob Geldof
Print Email
A message to Families Need Fathers from Bob Geldof

The forced removal of fathers from their children is hateful and it is done under the auspices of a law that is profoundly unjust. It is of course an oxymoron to have unjust law. It is also a moral nonsense and this law having failed will fall. It is your job to hasten that day.

While family law remains flagrantly biased, prejudicial, and discriminatory, when its effects are in direct opposition to its intent, when inalienable rights go unrecognised, when the administrators of that law exist in an exclusive world of secrecy and overweening state power, when the cost of the implementation of this law to the state is onerous and the cost to society unbearable, when judgement is ordained by the sentiment of past ages and while our men and our children are forced through this disgusting and baleful construct, cruelly and surely ironically called 'Family' law, to exist in a world of emptiness, pain, loss, yearning and grief then all efforts must be made to focus through debate, lobbying and campaigning to strike it down forever.

Every person who is part of this organisation should act politically. Organise groups in your areas to contact others affected. Write letters, keep the subject in your newspapers, agitate and lobby your MPs. Be visible in your pain but rational in your argument, be angered by your loss but use reason against the unreasonable and above everything be motivated by the love of your children.

This law can and will be changed. Use your agony and dismay. Channel it to action. Let every humiliation and tear move you forward so that no child nor man may suffer again what you have.

Good luck,

Bob Geldof

December 2003

No I got to claim bull on this I am sorry . WHEN MEN DO NOT HAVE TO SUFFER the evil of never having to see their beloved ones because the pathetically evil ex partners do the things they do and the courts back them up. NO I will not support equal rights for women intill MEN are not emotionally abused by a biased UK court system!

So no given the EVIL that women do to their kids in the UK to spite their ex and this is not the exception this is a ROUTINE BASIS then I refuse to support equal rights and equal pay until this travesty is corrected.
The worst thing is you women in the UK PLAY THE VICTIM when actuality you are the aggressor. Men generally won't DREAM of using their child as a weapon against their ex, however a woman in the UK would NOT HESITATE as she knows that she has the WHOLE system behind her even if she is an abusive little cow!

So no until there is TRUE equal rights and not 'some are more equal than others' in the United Kingdom then I have to say NO !

Another link
[news.bbc.co.uk]

Audrey Damazer, Justice's Clerk for London's 17 family courts, insists that allegations of bias in the court are the result of a lack of understanding.

But although initial decisions may be free of gender bias, she admits that courts regularly fail to punish mothers who refuse to comply with contact orders as a display of power, or out of spite.

"It is incredibly difficult to enforce an order where a mother is adamant," she says.

Below is a letter written to the THEN Prime Minister David Cameron (Hamron)

Letter sent on 12th May 2010 to:
David Cameron, Prime Minister
(and copied to)
Nick Clegg, Deputy Prime Minister
Ed Balls, Shadow Children's Secretary

Dear Mr Cameron,

For many years now women have enjoyed equal rights in this country. Their rights of equality are recognised in the workplace, in the provision of goods and services, divorce and separation, and in all other areas of life, yet men who are separated from their partners and children continue to be treated as secondary parties in the Family Courts.

Fathers play a very important role in the mental and emotional development of their children, yet there have been many documented cases in which a father is allowed a woefully inadequate amount of contact: an hour a month in a supervised environment, or merely a few letters a year. The courts, Cafcass and others tend to be biased towards mothers and what they want, often prioritising the mother's emotional welfare over the child's needs.

If a father is lucky enough to secure a decent amount of contact, mothers can flout the order without any particular fear of reprisals. Individuals who breach other types of court orders are vigorously and fiercely pursued, yet in the family courts not enough is done to ensure that enforcement of a breach is a sufficient deterrent.

Whilst it is the child's welfare that is paramount in terms of contact with both parents, we believe that it is our children's rights under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights (right to family life) that are systematically breached under the current system.

We are an informal group of people who share a common aim – reform of treatment of fathers in the family courts. We are of no particular political persuasion, and come from all social, educational and financial circumstances. None of us formed our relationships or fathered our children thinking that we would ever be in this situation but we have, for various reasons, found ourselves in court fighting for the right to be fathers to our children.

Given that men and women enjoy equal rights elsewhere in society, why is there no legal presumption that men and women should share contact with a child between both parents? Separated single sex couples would not, and do not, have this problem. Fathers who are separated do not become worse parents as a result, neither do single mothers automatically become better parents. Of course, as loving, committed parents we want to be as much a part of our children's lives as possible – but the effect of non-contact with our children, often determined by a stranger at Cafcass with whom we have spent very little time, is detrimental to our children's growth and development as well as destroying many fathers' lives.

Fathers are too often the last party that the courts consider. We, for our part, would rather not be going to court at all, but do what is necessary to enable us to maintain relationships with the people who are of paramount importance to us in our lives. We implore the new government to prioritise a wholesale review of the family courts system, and to address the continuing discrimination against fathers to favour equal rights for fathers and mothers.

Yours faithfully

John Rowlinsonon behalf of
www.SeparatedDads.co.uk

Thumbs up!

It was 1893 when New Zealand women got to vote, this was thanks to suffrage campaigners, led by Kate Sheppard. This great lady is the face on our $10 note

That oughta be celebrated for sure.

It was 99 years ago that women in America got the vote.

For well over hundred years women have fought for the right to be recognized as "persons", the right to vote, the right to own property, and the right to represent in government. As women, we have a lot to be thankful for.