Father's Rights (right wing, that is)
As a divorced father who has his kids half time, I find the 'Father's Rights' movement pretty much a joke. All of the sites on the web that I have found have been either right wing or crayon-toting, evangelical Christian based. Not my cup of tea.
The men that write columns on these sites seem to me to be more upset about losing control over their women (and their paycheck since many have to pay the dreaded 'child support') than losing their family. Yes, I know I am painting this all with a very broad brush stroke, but I only know what I have seen.
An example of such a man is David Usher, who writes for a web site called MensNewsDaily (I have not figured out this link stuff yet, so no link at this time). I found him via a feminist blog called Archaeopteryx. The particular article they pointed out is titled : Winning the War Against Fatherhood, Alive. The gist of the article is that women (driven by the evil feminist) are doing everything they can to destroy the institution of marriage and family (he calls no-fault divorce a 'feminist institution'). It is quite the tome. Everything wrong with marriage today and the high divorce rate is all because of the feminist movement.
Surprising enough, he may have a point. Feminism and the empowerment it has provided women has had a large influence on the movement towards no-fault divorces and the child support system. That is not necessarily a bad thing, but that is not how Mr. Usher sees it.
My favorite part of the article is when he cites Perry Manley as someone who gave his life for the Father's Rights Movement. Mr. Manley was shot by police outside of a courthouse when he was brandishing what turned out to be a drilled-out WWII hand grenade. He did not like the fact that he had been ordered by the court to pay child support to his ex-wife. Usher compares Manley to the people in China that were mowed down while they demonstrated for free speech. I think that may be a bit of a stretch.
OK, you might ask. What about the child support court orders that seem on the surface to be way out of line. Isn't that unfair? Perhaps. I am sure that one can find examples of abuses of the system by both men and women. But I find it hard to argue that children are not entitled to the lifestyle that the highest earning parent can provide. Just because the parents are not together should not affect the lifestyle of the children.
Yea, yea .... I know. This means that the other parent is able to string along with the children and enjoy a lifestyle that they may not deserve. But so what? It is still important for the children to have that lifestyle.
I know I am making this more simple than it really is. I think it all comes down to the fact that parents must try to find that right middle ground between:
I know I have rambled a bit here (hence, the blog title) and have covered a number of different areas. My intention was to focus on the Father's Rights movement, but instead ventured into divorce and children in divorce. I will make another attempt at some point to write more about the Father's Rights (and Men's Rights) movements (hopefully when I have better web access and have figured out how to put links into these posts).
Update: Guess if I open my eyes, I will see the link icon on the editor. Added some links to the post.
The men that write columns on these sites seem to me to be more upset about losing control over their women (and their paycheck since many have to pay the dreaded 'child support') than losing their family. Yes, I know I am painting this all with a very broad brush stroke, but I only know what I have seen.
An example of such a man is David Usher, who writes for a web site called MensNewsDaily (I have not figured out this link stuff yet, so no link at this time). I found him via a feminist blog called Archaeopteryx. The particular article they pointed out is titled : Winning the War Against Fatherhood, Alive. The gist of the article is that women (driven by the evil feminist) are doing everything they can to destroy the institution of marriage and family (he calls no-fault divorce a 'feminist institution'). It is quite the tome. Everything wrong with marriage today and the high divorce rate is all because of the feminist movement.
Surprising enough, he may have a point. Feminism and the empowerment it has provided women has had a large influence on the movement towards no-fault divorces and the child support system. That is not necessarily a bad thing, but that is not how Mr. Usher sees it.
My favorite part of the article is when he cites Perry Manley as someone who gave his life for the Father's Rights Movement. Mr. Manley was shot by police outside of a courthouse when he was brandishing what turned out to be a drilled-out WWII hand grenade. He did not like the fact that he had been ordered by the court to pay child support to his ex-wife. Usher compares Manley to the people in China that were mowed down while they demonstrated for free speech. I think that may be a bit of a stretch.
OK, you might ask. What about the child support court orders that seem on the surface to be way out of line. Isn't that unfair? Perhaps. I am sure that one can find examples of abuses of the system by both men and women. But I find it hard to argue that children are not entitled to the lifestyle that the highest earning parent can provide. Just because the parents are not together should not affect the lifestyle of the children.
Yea, yea .... I know. This means that the other parent is able to string along with the children and enjoy a lifestyle that they may not deserve. But so what? It is still important for the children to have that lifestyle.
I know I am making this more simple than it really is. I think it all comes down to the fact that parents must try to find that right middle ground between:
- The best thing for the kids
- The best thing for the parents
I know I have rambled a bit here (hence, the blog title) and have covered a number of different areas. My intention was to focus on the Father's Rights movement, but instead ventured into divorce and children in divorce. I will make another attempt at some point to write more about the Father's Rights (and Men's Rights) movements (hopefully when I have better web access and have figured out how to put links into these posts).
Update: Guess if I open my eyes, I will see the link icon on the editor. Added some links to the post.
posted by gym at 5:02 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home