Can’t Find A Husband?
| February 26, 2007 at 06:24:47Can’t Find a Husband? |
I have bad news for the ladies out there looking for a husband. Today’s men are afraid of marriage and having kids. This is most likely because their male friends and relatives have told them what usually happens in the event of a divorce with children. In fact, some men are calling for a marriage strike.
I’m a liberal female father’s advocate, activist, writer and blogger. I’ve been studying the effect our current family law has on families, and why the laws are written the way they are. Unfortunately I have more bad news.We women have allowed radical feminists to take over the feminist movement, the one that used to stand for equality, and they’ve been negatively influencing family law. Now it’s all about domination; in the case of divorce it’s having complete control over the kids, house, money and dad’s visitation time.
Many fathers want equal physical custody of their children after a relationship break-up. If women deserve equality, men do too, right? Then why are feminists, who claim to be about equality, opposing us whenever we introduce equal-parenting laws? I’ve even seen them lying during their testimony to a legislative committee. They’re also changing domestic violence laws to make them even more anti-male, though the facts show males and females batter each other equally and mothers abuse children more than fathers.
Our country is in a fatherless crisis, yet men who are natural hands-on daddies are scoffed at. These men who embrace fatherhood are shown their time and influence isn’t important. Our government does this by enforcing child support orders while not enforcing visitation orders. Whether the father had due process in court or not, whether blatant errors were made, when the DNA test shows he’s not the father, and even when there is no child, our government punishes fathers, including throwing them in jail, for getting behind in child support.
The number one fear of children whose parents are divorcing is losing one parent. Yet millions of fathers, and some mothers are prevented from having natural, fully functioning, dedicated and loving relationships with their children after divorce. Unmarried fathers face the same problem. There are many men across the country, single and divorced, who want equal physical custody of their children, who want to help with home work, meet with teachers, take the kids to the dentist, all the normal things parents do.
Mothers and fathers tell me they don’t believe 4 days and 4 evenings a month is adequate time to develop the kind of relationship necessary for the healthy development of their children. In many cases the sole custodial parent even interferes with that limited time, and in some cases cuts the noncustodial parent completely off from their child even if they’ve done nothing wrong.
A vindictive parent can essentially steal the child by moving the child far away, encouraging negative feelings and thoughts the child has about the noncustodial parent, or filing a false domestic violence report. The way the laws are written today, a divorcing woman can report that her husband was throwing things, say she’s in fear, and with just her word she can get a temporary restraining order and emergency child custody order. One study showed half the temporary restraining orders granted were for cases where no physical harm was even claimed. Another showed the abuse claimed could not be verified fifty-nine percent of the time.
The father in a case like this doesn’t get a chance to face a judge or jury; he’s automatically considered guilty of abuse or potential abuse. This happens without proof of any wrongdoing, and can happen without his knowledge. Once she has the emergency custody order, he has very little, or in most cases no chance of getting equal custody. Every day innocent fathers visit their children in jail-like supervised visitation centers and take anger management classes, sometimes for years. Worse yet, some of these men not only are innocent of domestic violence, they’re the victims. Some children of these innocent men never see Daddy again.
The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) has encouraged programs that promote the idea that batterers are male, victims are female, and every child should be in the sole physical custody of it’s mother. In other words, our government supports programs that vilify men. The Violence Against Women Act needs to be reformed or eliminated, and I-VAWA, the international version, needs to be rejected.
If we want men to embrace the idea of family life, we need to ensure they have equality in family law. Equal parenting laws, favored by 85% of people polled, need to be passed nationwide and a Federal Family Rights Act needs to be established immediately to protect families dealing with Child Protective Services and parents in divorce and child custody cases. The time has come to restore human and civil rights to all fit parents.
Now, back to looking for your husband. I’ve been working with fathers in the equal parenting movement for a few years now. These guys are some of the smartest and kindest friends I’ve had, and some of the most loving and dedicated daddies I’ve ever met. They’ve experienced pain and injustice at the hands of women. When they meet women who respect them, who understand that most men make great parents, they return a special kind of respect and appreciation. Come join us; you can make new friends, and have the satisfaction of helping a very honorable cause. And who knows, maybe you’ll be at a rally one day and meet your future husband.
Take action — click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Reform Family Law So Fit Parents Of Both Genders Have Equal Rights
I'm a sun and nature loving, 50-something, laid back, forward thinking, liberal anti-feminist egalitarian, san francisco bay area native, single mom of 4 and yia yia to 2. I've been active in the equal parenting movement since 2002. Known as the purple Queen of Equality, I once blogged as the Feminist4Fathers. Find me now on sharedparentingworks.org and jugsforjustice.org. | More from Teri Stoddard
Stumble It!
March 9th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
Teri, I actually built a white picket fence once. What a pain. Ok, it wasn’t white. It was Jarra wood so I stained it. The ex has it around my ex house.
March 9th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Hey, I love white picket fences! : )
March 9th, 2007 at 10:21 am
> according to the U.S. Census, single women are the
> fastest-growing segment of the American population.
This is mathematically impossible. For every single woman there’s a man who’s not married to her, and vice versa, just as for every single mom there’s a family-less father (or two or three). The various paired populations grow at the same rate, to a first approximation. If one wanted to get precise, you could take into account the fact that more boys than girls are born, and that males have a higher mortality rate than women. But doing so is only going to show that any difference in the rates of growth of the various populations is of the order of a few percent. So the quoted statement is little more than headline type bombast signalling a new bogus trend.
> …for years, everyone quoted erroneous statistics that
> said there were not enough men for all the single women.
So where was this previously unknown population of single men discovered by the census takers? There was never a ‘man shortage’ to begin with. Quite the contrary. Among never-married 34-39 year-olds, men outnumbered women four to three in the 2000 census. The only place where the ratio was reversed was in the media capitol of NYC…
—–
I’ve always found the whole biz about ‘committment-phobia’ interesting. It’s always been about what the woman wants. I.e., if you go out on a first date, and, as the male, answer the inevitable questions about what you want and what you’re looking for with something to the effect that you want to settle down, have kids, and live happily ever after behind a white picket fence, then many a ‘modern’ woman will take you for a retro knuckledragger who wants to keep women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, as the cliche goes. No good. On the other hand, if you’re non-commital and end up ‘hooking-up’ in some manner or another, then after 15 or 18 months she’s likely to start talking about moving in together and/or other signs of bonding and long-term commitment. Now, when the male balks, he’s branded as being commitment-phobic and all the rest. So the thing about commitment is it has to be something she thinks up. It has to coincide with her timing. It has to be about him conforming to her wishes and expectations, rather than the other way around.
March 8th, 2007 at 6:52 pm
Red Pill, she considers commitment to be of the VERY GREATEST importance. It has to be TOTAL and for ALL TIME.
She is always willing and eager to commit and ‘intuitively’ ‘knows’ that it takes practice. Lots of practice. It has to be done over and over. She thinks about it every day. He has to reaffirm his commitment every day.
It is he who has ‘difficulty’ committing.
To him it’s a one- off thing. He thinks about it deeply, for some time, usually too long, not understanding it’s importance to her that he does it right NOW. He commits his future, his earnings, his labour, his freedoms. It is important to him. He only need do it once.
She initiates 80% of divorces.
Then she wants his future commitment to continue support her so she hires lawyers and takes him to Court to make him remain committed to paying for the rest of his life. If she can do this several times, it confirms her commitment to commitment.
The more men fight this, the more she ‘understands’ that men are the ones who are reluctant to commit.
March 8th, 2007 at 11:12 am
and Which Hunter, you got it goin on dude…
March 8th, 2007 at 11:08 am
Maybe I missed something? When did marriage actually become a particularly special commitment for women? I mean other than the dudes being kicked out and forced to send money I don’t see any other obvious or implicit commintments engineered into the system…
March 8th, 2007 at 10:11 am
The following was on AOLs website today:
The Secret’s Out: Some Women Fear Commitment, Too
By INGRID STURGIS, AOL COACHES
You know her.
She is the queen of first dates. She has a coterie of close girlfriends with whom she dissects in detail every humiliating date with the bad boys she adores. She’s the one who has been happily engaged for half-a-decade or more with no wedding in sight. Or she rebounds from one long-term relationship to another without ever stopping to reflect. She tells you that all the good men are taken. You tell her she’s too picky. She replies, “Why do I have to settle?”
(Translation: Good Guys who treat her right are door mats to her. Bad Boys that treat her like a door mat are exciting….until she finds a rich one to cash in on. Equality is only good when it works in her favor.)
Some might call her an independent woman. But Elina Furman, author of ‘Kiss and Run: The Single, Picky, and Indecisive Girl’s Guide to Overcoming Her Fear of Commitment,’ calls her commitment phobic. Apparently women are not only bringing home the bacon and frying it up in a pan, but they’ve adopted the same bad behaviors that women have long attributed to men.
(Here’s that Strong Independent Label again. Except this whole column is about yet another female issue that needs to be addressed. Poor things.)
“There are a lot of woman in their mid-20s and -30s doing everything to sabotage their relationships,” Furman says, from dismissing men before getting to know them better to playing the field. Even women in their 40s and older — who have been married, divorced and have raised their children — are reveling in their newfound freedom.
(Translation: Sure you are. Seeing how marriage rates have dropped and the single population is at an all time high do to the fact that men are refusing to sign a sham contract you NEED to put a happy face on it. Of course, if you are in your 40s and older having been married, divorced, my bet is that you want to spend all that divorce money on yourself until you find another sucker to keep you into a lifestyle you’ve become accustomed to. It’s so tough being a woman these days!)
In the past 30 years, society has changed, giving women more options for work, family and relationships. As a result, women are more independent than ever. At 47 million strong, according to the U.S. Census, single women are the fastest-growing segment of the American population. And with society more accepting of their single status, women are free to pursue whatever choices they want to make. However, conflicts can arise from all this newfound freedom: More women are living life on their own terms but finding it harder to compromise.
(Translation: Well that’s good news! Single women are the fastest growing segment of the population. That must mean that men aren’t marrying them. It’s been 40 years plus with this whole feminist thing girl, it is way past time to stop using phrases like “and with society more acceptingâ€. Talk about a crucifixion complex, geez get over it.)
Furman says she knows these commitment-phobic women well because she used to be one of them. “I was in a long-term relationship. We never even talked about marriage, or moving in together. It never came up once in all the time we were together. What’s wrong with me that I would be someone for that long and not think about it as a possibility?”
When that relationship ended, Furman says she became a serial dater. Eventually, she was dissatisfied with her relationships with men. “Every day I would struggle with wanting to stay and wanting to leave. Is this person right for me?” Furman says she started to wonder what was at the root of her behavior. Like any good researcher, the author, (who previously homed into another lifestyle trend with her book ‘Boomerang Nation’) began to ask questions, eventually interviewing 100 women about their views on relationships. “I needed answers,” she says. “I started interviewing women. I talked to psychologists.”
(Yep. Go talk to the psychologists you Strong Independent Woman you!)
The work eventually helped her to get at the root of her issues. It was, she says, a cathartic experience and fodder for the book. “Other women needed the help as well. It validates our fears. So many women wrote in who had the same issues.”
(Big surprise there.)
One of those issues is the strength of female bonding. “Girlfriends travel together,” the author says. “And women are single for so much longer. I believe in the bonds that women share, but women have become so close knit that there is no room for a man to come in anymore. All emotional needs are taken care of by a small group of women who have a stake in keeping each other single.”
(“women have become so close knit that there is no room for a man to come in anymore.†So then what is your point here? You are trying to cure a phobia that really is not a phobia? You are happy without a man? Fine. Then shut up and get on with living. You don’t need to write a book then either. )
Another is the pickiness. “We always see the stereotype of the men who want to date a supermodel. Now we see this happening with women,” Furman says. “Expectations are skyrocketing out of control. Women have economic power and now they are acting like men. Pickiness is a luxury that women can now afford.”
(Oh come on! You women have been ALWAYS looking for Mr. Rich and Good Looking. Geez, you can’t even be honest with yourselves. Maybe you do need those psychologists.)
One prime example is Jennifer Aniston’s dashed relationship with Brad Pitt, who tabloids say only wanted to settle down and have children, which he has done with Angelina Jolie. She, ironically, is yet another independent woman who tabloids often point out is ambivalent about marriage but not children. Another example is the runaway bride who skipped out on her groom and her wedding and fled to Mexico.
(Women Strong-Men Weak. Women Good-Men Bad. This has gotten so old.
I thought the runaway bride ran away because she was a nutcase. Turns out she was a Strong-Independent woman who did not want children with a weak man. Go figure.)
Commitment phobia is not just an American trend but also a global phenomenon, Furman says, with women in Japan, Australia and Britain adopting the same behaviors. These women, she says, are not settling down. They want to experience life, shop, travel, work, count their money, and play. “They fear having a husband is going to compromise their lifestyle,” she says. “They fear of giving up freedom.” In addition, she says, relationships get a bad rap today with all the negative messages in the media about relationships. “Growing up in this day and age, you’d be freaked out, too,” Furman says.
(And I thought it had to do with men having no stake or rights whatsoever in marriage and family and deciding relationships with women offer men NOTHING. Did’nt know it had to do with wanting Louis Vuiton and Gucci.)
This trend is especially unsettling for men, the author says. “Men don’t understand why women are roaring so much. A lot of men are much more relationship- and family-oriented than women.” She says women often feel that men have more to gain in a marriage and many feel as if men always win and women always lose in a relationship. In addition, when men play the nice guy, they may not get the girl. The author says, often it’s not his issues but hers that interfere in a relationship. She says many women are saying to men, “It’s your fault,” rather than admit that they are scared of commitment.
(Here we go again. Woman-Strong, Man-Weak. And you women are wondering why so many of us men do not discriminate the feminists from “regular†women anymore?)
Furman says for years, everyone quoted erroneous statistics that said there were not enough men for all the single women. She says even though those stats have been debunked, women still rely on flawed probabilities, often blaming men for their predicament. However, says Furman, this defeatism masks their underlying fear of commitment. The ones who say there aren’t enough men are blaming things outside themselves. The author says women should stop looking outside themselves and look inside to figure out why they are afraid of intimacy. Intimacy, she says, can be scary.
(“women still rely on flawed probabilities, often blaming men for their predicament.†Ah Hah!! RELYING ON FLAWED PROBABILITIES AND OFTEN BLAMING MEN. . And you women are wondering why so many of us men do not discriminate the feminists from “regular†women anymore?)
So what’s a woman to do? Furman says the first step is to admit you have a problem. In ‘Kiss and Run,’ she details seven types of commitment phobes: The Nit-Picker, The Serial Dater, The Long-Distance Runner, The Tinker Belle, The Free Spirit, Damsel in Distress and The Player. In addition, her book offers steps on how to stop derailing relationships with quizzes, first-person accounts and expert advice to help these women to change their ways. Eventually, Furman says, commitment phobic women can get over themselves and move on to a healthy, satisfying and emotionally committed relationship. She ought to know; she did.
(Step 1.-Admit you have a problem (here’s that ‘problem†excuse again. Wouldn’t have anything to do with personal responsibility now would it?)
(Step 2.-Buy her book.)
Elina Furman offers single women tips and advice on how to conquer their commitment anxiety and curb overanalysis.
(”CURB OVERANALYSIS”???!!!!!! GIVE ME A BREAK!!)
March 8th, 2007 at 9:23 am
Any criticism of the behavior of women (any or all women) is inevitably going to be characterized as “hating women” – just as feminists have been shrieking “misogyny” and “sexism” for the past 4 decades. It is a very effective manipulative tool to force a change of subject away from the specific behaviors being criticized and put men on the defensive – having to prove that they don’t hate women. Virtually every woman I have ever dealt with on these subjects uses this form of manipulation, therefore they do all come off looking like feminists.
Here is a head’s up for all those “nice normal average innocent” women out there – the effectiveness of this tactic is wearing out from over use. What makes it so foul is that it is only effective when it is not true. It is spoken as a known lie with some awareness that the power of it depends entirely on how false it is – the more a man really likes women, the more effective it will be at silencing him. A man who truly did not like women would not be the slightest bit daunted by such an accusation – it would simply be a statement of truth.
FEMININE-ism has become a caricature of femininity, and turned most women into caricatures. As a result, this accusation of “hating women” has been so overused that it has become meaningless. Once a man stops caring what the woman making the accusation thinks of him, he starts ignoring the accusations and sticking with the original subject.
There have been many substantive issues which men here have raised that the female contingent continues to refuse to address, and continues to fall back on the worn out “you all just hate women.” Misogynists are not born, they are made, and this continued denial and refusal to dialogue on the issues fairly makes more every day. There is 1000x the true misogyny in this culture as a result of 4 decades of feminism than existed before that twisted ideology raised its ugly head.
Women have painted men into a corner when it comes to dealing with them – men can either capitulate to their every demand, or be called “woman haters.” It is reaching the point in the culture where the 2nd option is preferable to the first.
March 8th, 2007 at 7:53 am
bellak,
You seem to read (or respond to) only the posts where there may be some harsh words written against “all” women. I’ll go out on a limb here and say that “most” men posting here and otherwise do not hate women. But we (I) lack the trust in them or our rules of law to enter and remain in a relationship whereby we (I) have a great chance to be hurt.
Just as the feminazi view that “all men are rapists” and “all men are bad” has infected the minds of women over last past few decades, the notion that men have a tremendous chance to get the injured emotionally, financially and perhaps even physically should they marry or father a child, well that message has started to be heard and heeded. Younger men should not be brainwashed into hating women by us older fellows who have had some difficulties, but they should be educated as to the grave risks posed.
contrarymary, speak to me.
I don’t hate you or anybody else. What do you say to me (or perhaps your grandson in a few years) when asked: Should I take a chance at marriage, where I could lose all I have worked for all my life to a woman who has a change of mind or to a lawyer who won’t have my interests at heart. Should I father another child who can be taken away from me for no legitimate reason other than I am the father?
March 7th, 2007 at 11:59 pm
Rosemarie, nice to see you on here.
March 7th, 2007 at 9:39 pm
PS Thank you for alerting me to the fact my children despise me, my cuddly grandson will probably stone me in the street when he’s 18, and my loving man actually thinks hates my self-entitled, greedy, materialistic a$$. I’d have never known. I’m just thankful I have all you rational, caring, NON BITTER men of superior intelligence to show me what a sorry specimen I really am.
Teri, you’re a better woman than I. Despite the fact that I care deeply about father’s rights, and am living with a man accused of the most heinous crimes, and am prepared to write a book about same, I could not bear the put downs, the insults, the downright hatred of some men toward me – toward all American women – on these MRA sites. I’ve cried enough tears and for what? For men who hate me, sight unseen? Please. They’re not worth it.
Anyway, kKeep up the good work.
When is the article on false accusations going to be published?
March 7th, 2007 at 9:30 pm
OMG! I’m one of those HORRIBLE AMERICAN WOMEN – I’d like to post, but I’m too busy wounding every male in the Delaware Valley. Once I find a better paying job – one that I don’t have to put in an average of 68 hours per week – I’ll have even more time to be the MOST VILE SPECIMEN on the PLANET! It’s not easy, what with being a vacuous bimbo with zero creativity, no courage and zero inventiveness, BUT THANK GOD FOR MY VAGINA! Because you know every man on the planet is aching to f*ck this hot little Italian Nana. When they do, I’ll be sure to cry rape, because that’s what we VILE AMERICAN WOMEN DO BEST.
YIPPEE!!! I do have something to live for after all!!!!!!!!
March 7th, 2007 at 6:56 pm
I like Terri because she at least tries to see it another way than the socially-prescribed, reactionary Feminist doctrines we all know & despise. Unfortunately, there will always be an amount of non-empathy in anything written about the opposite gender because, well there is so much BS in gender politics. Women are less qualified to speak about men than they were 30 years ago because Feminism has selfishly sought to redefine us for that long. These days I spend more time wondering what goes on in womens’ heads when they think about men, than I do think about women themselves.
After all, women are pretty simple. They want it all for free & will use either their vaginas or what is born of them, to get it.
Nothing new.
Nothings changed, except we started believing the bull about inequality.
Men meanwhile have the brains, the inventiveness, the courage, the creativity & the preparedness to sacrifice themselves that saw us get here from the trees. And it is time they realised we are in a gender war that has been waged against us for decades. Getting caught up in BS debates about equality, paternity rights, earning capacities & so on is just buying the propaganda & wasting time that future generations will pay for.
On the other hand, women should realise that as a gender, they have depended upon us since time began. There has never been a matriarchial society nor will there ever be; the term is an oxymoron. Men do not need the approval of women any more than we need that of children & certainly have no reason to obey the less intelligent half of the species.
(Btw if you don’t realise men have higher IQs, you need to catch-up on the facts. Its plain science, not politics.)
The biggest joke for me is this shared parenting stuff & the reactionary denial of DNA testing etc. We are living in a dream where women think they have a function beyond being mothers. They are mistaken as every right enjoyed by them was gifted by men. Biting the hand that feeds is never self-serving in the end & as they discover their new-found irrelevancy, they will complain about non-marriage as if it only existed for their own financial security. They will wonder why – as the self-absorbed assholes they have become – no bloke is willing to make them his everything. They will work long hours in crap jobs, their kids will hate them & in general, they will discover the uneviable other side of their so-called oppression.
Leave them to their fate. Hire hookers, enjoy your freedom & never, ever become a father.
March 7th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
There is no equality as there is no universal method of assigning the same degree of emphasis to the mu;titude of variable factors that make up a persons various perception. You cnat make everyone want and define things the same way. it is a functional Tower of babel.
March 7th, 2007 at 2:02 pm
Precisely correct.
Women will never, in any way shape or form give up their privileges.
No way, there is also no possibility of being a “part-time” feminist as any association makes you one. There is no fence sitting on that hypocritical, lying, man-hate doctrine.
March 6th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
bellak wrote:
Teri,
I applaud your ability to advocate on behalf of men’s rights. I have to say that what I like about your posts is a focus on equality which, in my opinion, is what feminism was supposed to be about.
On another discussion (Spain’s Feminist Platform For Shared Parenting) about “promoting equality” Teri wrote:
“I decide each issue independently. I can agree with either side if they’re promoting equality.â€
Denis says:
Except that perfect equality is impossible to attain. However when “promoting†equality, the rules are always set up to move in that direction by whatever definition the feminists decide (today) is the meaning of “equality†(without ever getting to the end zone because as I said it is impossible). And who always ends up paying the price for “promoting†equality? Answer: the men. As ONE example:
Moronic Statement Alert
“Equality of opportunity is easy to attain.â€
Try saying that to young black men living in ghettos and also see how ‘equal’ are their ‘opportunities’ when compared to those living in rich neighbourhoods and who have been educated in the most expensive of schools.
Try saying that to short dumpy women who wish to become ballet dancers.
Try saying that to the boys whose education is being biased in favor of the girls.
We are 40 years into “promoting†equality for women and with many feminists we are not even close. The rules are always changing based on new statistics that are generated to show more disadvantage to women so that more disadvantage can be heaped on men. IT IS NEVER-ENDING. And average women who disagree have been silent for 40 years. There are too many women everywhere benfitting from the status quo to call for a change-UNLESS they pay a bigger price in some other way, e.g., not being able to find a man stupid enough to marry them. Making generalizations about women bothers some people. Even when it is true. Good! It is enraging to be unfairly treated isn’t it? There is a lesson to be learned there.
My point is that the search for ‘equality’ is never-ending, and that in the process of searching for this impossible goal, the stirring up of male hatred is a major consequence – and, indeed, in the case of feminists, it is a purposeful aim.
And seasoned men’s activists will know that whatever statistical differences are found between men and women, the feminists will always manage to stir up hatred towards men on the basis of them.
As ONE example, Affirmative Action will never end until America has an equal number of accountants, engineers, doctors, bricklayers, and an equal distribution of managers, CFOs, CEOs, directors,…etc. between men and women. Until that point, the rules of “promoting equality†will benefit women and hurt men.
Now I ask the clear thinking people here: If you are a member of the group that most benefits by the rules “promoting equality†and you are in a position to “reform†a system that the other group is objecting about-well just how far will the privileged group go to look out for the equality of the side that has always been on the losing team? My guess is that they will always look for ways where they keep their advantages.
Okay. Okay. I’m mixing posts. And I’m repeating myself. Go ahead, sue me. But this whole idea of “promoting equality” is important to discuss. It gets at the core of motivation.
For me, the motivation is JUSTICE.
March 6th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
Zed, will you tell Angry Harry that his cognitive cluster bombs are outlawed by the Zed Convention, or shall I?
March 6th, 2007 at 12:40 pm
marriage has become a contract wherby the provisions of the contract have nothing to do with determining whos at fault and assessing punishment when the relationship fails ir vcomes otherwise inconvenient. There’s no point whatsoever of legally entering into a contract where the behaviour of those engaged in it is immaterial and the language is not interpreted the same way for all parties.
It has become a sham document.
In a relationship of earnest intent, there is no more and no less implicit slavery and stereotyped behaviour for either participant, simply the grass being greener elsewhere. All I want out of life is a partner who pulls their weight in a relationship knowing what the various strengths and weaknesses are of each party and not changing the rules once it is perceived that the other is ’stuck’ with them. People are too varied to allow making strict absolute rules about what they want or should have. The gov’t cannot get involved without stereotyping everyones roles and expectations. Best be it for copuples wanting marital status to responsiobly write a contract to each other so that when judgment comes down it will be based on evaluation of each members responsibility and behaviour and not some judge with a redistribution agenda. It wont happen of coures. I’ve been told by a variety of gals, if someone really loves you and youre a decent guy the paperwork doesnt matter. The fact that it does most definately matter regardless speaks volumes and reaffirms that marriage, like all relationships revolves around cost-benefit analysis made by the individuals involved. My experience is such that once the paperworks signed things change in how I’m treated and I for one am sick of it. Depending on the charactor of those involved being married is nothing but a game of “GOTCHA!, bad enough even without the present bias…
March 6th, 2007 at 6:18 am
I don’t think that men are ever going to “rain bombs” on women, amfortas. At least, I hope they don’t because that will be playing right into the stereotypes of men which the feminasties set up like pit-traps for us to fall into.
As I keep saying over and over – “men” are not some monolithic bloc or amorphous mass like “jello.” One very real difference I keep observing between the sexes is that women tend to have much more of a hive mind, where men tend to be far more individualistic.
Guys who have been badly burned by the court system do tend to be very angry about being burned. It is one of those traps I just mentioned which tries to make their anger the issue itself and divert attention from what it is that they are angry about. And, once they are caught in that trap they are stuck in the circumstances which cause that anger with no way out of it.
Forty years ago, when this whole idiotic mess got started, marriage was the norm. Almost everyone got married and had kids. That was just what people did. The pressure to do so was equally strongly applied to both sexes. But, the men who went along with those social values and pressures found that the rules got changed on them after the fact – fatherhood and marriage were criminalized after they had already committed (to) it.
It’s fairly typical for women to cast men’s actions and experience in terms of their own female experience. Thus, women say that men are “afraid” of marriage and fatherhood. However, that is mostly projection. I’m not the least bit “afraid” of rolling around naked in a patch of poison ivy – I just see it as something with lots of very negative consequences and absolutely nothing to recommend it. That is basically how I view marriage – lots of risks and downsides, no rewards. Why do it?
Lots of feministS have come out very strongly against marriage – painting it as basically “slavery” for women. When I look at it as an outsider, it looks to more to me like “slavery” for men, and divorce certainly is. As it stands today, “marriage” amounts to little more than temporary cohabitation and fornication with a temporary certificate issued by the state which can be revoked at any time by either party. That is nothing like the concept of marriage which I grew up with.
What makes this dialogue so complex and difficult is that feminism literally is FEMININE-ism, and its central energy is the elevation of the feminine and the tearing down of the masculine. Teri admitted it – FEMININE-ism represents women’s feelings and issues. Starting from the orientation of the victim – women are so “oppressed” – FEMININE-ism has pushed for the purely female perspective, which is identical to the experience which many men have with women in their own relationships. Add to this the almost universal tendency of women to stand up for each other, and rise huffily to the defense of womanhood any time any man makes an insufficiently qualified statement which contains the word “women”, and it does begin to appear to men that women are the ones who are an amorphous mass – all dedicated to promoting the interests of women (the feminine) over the interests of men.
The whole concept of “patriarchy” is nothing but projection – women accusing men of what they themselves would do. The reality is that men are far more independent and individualistic.
Many times I have used the analogy that what has been happening over the past 40 years is like a group of women living on one side of a lake, with a different group of women (feminists) living on the other side pouring garbage and raw sewage into it. The women on the one side are not going to be able to continue to drink pure, sweet, untainted water forever. Sooner or later the sewage and garbage is going to build up to the point where their own water supply becomes poisoned. Women have relentlessly kept telling lies about us, and there is no need for a qualifier here, not all women did it, but most of the ones who did were, in fact, women. If I were to say something like “Egyptians built the pyramids”, few people would be idiotic enough to jump in with “But, NOT ALL Egyptians!” Saying that a group of people which did something had certain common characteristics is NOT saying that every person who has that characteristic participated equally.
However, because virtually all women share the characteristic of FEMININE-ism with feminists, the distinctions they try to draw between themselves and those “bad” feminists are laughable to most men. I have certainly seen plenty of the alleged “nice, normal, women” pissing in the lake from their side.
The cruel paradox for women is that this movement which purports to represent them and their interests is actually the one which hates them the most, holds them in utter contempt, and has sought to destroy everything they value most – mates, marriage, and children. All of the laws which affect the “Rights” part of the term “MRA” have to do with men having relationships with women. It is a woman, and a feminist, not a man – Linda Hirshman – who is ripping on women making the choice to stay at home and raise their children. It was a woman, and a feminist, not a man – Simone DeBeauvior – who said that no woman “should” be allowed to stay at home and raise her children, supported by a man.
Women are going to pay a price for the denial of female evil that they have, as a group, been egaged in and supporting for the past 40 years. I don’t believe that men will ‘rain bombs” on women – they will simply turn their backs on women and leave them alone (as women have been demanding that men do for the past 4 decades) and go their own way.
The people that women will eventually come to have the most legitimate reason to fear are other women – who have been totally freed of all restraints on dangerous, destructive, and even psychotic behavior. Lisa Marie Nowak set out to do serious damage to, if not kill, another woman. The dirtiest little secret of feminism and the whole DV industry is that lesbian relationships are among the most violent of all relationships. Forty three years down the line from Friedan’s book which supposedly ignited this whole “2nd wave” of feminism, women are still ducking behind the “feminine mystique” with statments like “women never lie” and “women are never violent unless a man abuses them into becoming so.”
It is not possible to completely change one set of characteristics of a system and not change the system as whole. It is not possible to “liberate” women from the social pressures to marry and live up to their traditional roles, while at the same time keeping men locked into their traditional roles using nothing but the legal system.
The cruel paradox for women is that the laws we are talking about punish and criminalize men for trying to have relationships with them. I have made the comment many times, and it always gets misintepreted, is that as long as I treat women like they could either have or be carrying the plague, then I have most ofl the rights I need. If women want to make it illegal to show “unwanted attention” toward them, then all I have to do is never show a woman any attention because I can never be sure it is “wanted.” If they want to push for laws that make it a crime to have a drink with a woman and then have sex with her, then that is something else I can very easily not do, as well.
While I understand those guys who are very grateful toward women like Teri who are speaking up, I’m not among the group for whom that translates into doing us any sort of favors. I think that going to the legislatures and begging for them to give us our rights back is exactly the wrong way to go about it.
By that very act, they accept the legitimacy of having those rights “taken” away from them. Those rights were not legitimately taken away – they were usurped, stolen. Men’s lives got invaded by undercover agents, by the very people they trusted most – their wives and lovers.
From my perspective, women like Teri who are finally speaking up are doing me no favors at all, and thus are going to be sorely disappointed if they do it only because they expect gratitude and effusive praise from me for doing it. I view the situation as her fighting for the rights of men to have relationships with women, which is at least as much to the benefit of women as it is to the benefit of men, if not moreso.
I have reached the point where the “prove to us that you are not bad guys” stance is nothing except profoundly annoying. If a woman wants to believe that I am a “bad guy”, then it is no more in my own interests than in hers to question that belief. In fact, since I have reached the stage of life where I am far less motivated than the average woman is to seek a relationship, the shoe is actually on the other foot and I consider it incumbent on the woman to prove to me that she really isn’t one of those “bad FEMININE-ists.”
I have a relationship of absolute perfect “equality” with every single woman out there – she lives in her house, I live in mine; she pays 100% of her own bills, I pay 100% of mine; she does 100% of the work it takes to keep her house up, I do 100% of the work it takes to keep mine up; she makes 100% of her own decisions, I make 100% of my own decisions. 100%/2 households = exactly, precisely, 50% to as many decimal places as you want to carry it.
I don’t have to listen to endless bitching, whining, complaining, pissing and moaning. I don’t have to keep score down to the fraction of a minute over who does more “housework”. I never have to worry about what position I left the toilet seat.
I have peace and quiet, serenity, and freedom. Anyone who thinks I’m going to twist myself in knots, or expend a lot of effort, to give that away is a complete fool.
March 6th, 2007 at 3:40 am
> I do think that men have a certain amount of privilege in our society…
I hear this claim made rather frequently, and whenever I do I’m compelled to ask: what privilege(s), exactly?
A lot of us have cards in our wallets saying “Male – Member of the Patriarchy”, and we never seem to have any occasion to whip them out and make them work their alleged magic.
> If women want equality in relationships and the workplace…
If I read this correctly, you seem to be saying you think women are disadvantaged in both circumstances. I’m hoping you know most men feel at a distinct disadvantage in ‘relationships’, that women hold all the cards, and that most women seem to know this intuitively when they go around with t-shirts of the sort which proclaim their unequivocal superiority (”It’s All About Me”, “Spoiled Princess”, “I Have the Pussy – I Make the Rules”, “I Make Boys Cry”, etc).
> The only way change will happen is through meaningful dialogue…
And what so many men are saying is that women being in the ‘one-up’ position means they don’t have to listen, and indeed the perception is they don’t — all the while proclaiming “men don’t listen” and that it’s women who are inherently and naturally better listeners.
There’s no dialogue without listening. And what lots of men have been trying to say against much refusal to hear is that almost all of this so-called dialogue has for decades been little more than women dictating to men how it is and how it’s going to be, and then calling men insulting names when they/we do try to speak up and present their/our point of view. This is an extremely common experience, and it makes us skeptical when we hear the “it’s all really about equality” propaganda reiterated cause that’s never been true so there’s little reason to think it will be so in the future.
March 6th, 2007 at 12:49 am
Teri,
I applaud your ability to advocate on behalf of men’s rights. I have to say that what I like about your posts is a focus on equality which, in my opinion, is what feminism was supposed to be about. Men and women are hurt by gender constructs that suggest women are always the better parent… my father, who died almost 2 years ago, was the most important person in my life. He was central in shaping many of my feminist ideals and my life would have been destroyed if he had ever been taken away becuase of a court system. He always told me that if I was going to be a feminist I needed to make sure that I fully understood all of the issues and that I never had a knee-jerk response to feminist issues. He introduced me to the works of more conservative feminists and reminded me that men could be hurt by women too. He worked hard in the 70s to make sure women were advanced to positions of responsibility where he worked. He also taught me to take care of myself and to make sure I got an education and an advanced degree so that I never had to rely on a man for financial support (well to be fair I relied on him a lot while I was pursuing my graduate degree—- but the goal was not to get married so I could be supported) That said, the vitriol against woman on this site is just as bad as the male bashing I see from radical feminists. I have been the one responsible for providing for the men in my life… and it has never bothered me. I mind the suggestion that all women are looking for a man so that they can ride him all the way to the bank. That such things happen to men is terrible and I do agree the court system (at least the family court system) is stacked against men. If my parents had divorced I would have hated to have to live with my mother… I would much rather have lived with my dad. There are bad men out there and there are bad women out there—- gender does not discriminate against bad behavior. I have been hurt by men, abused by men. lied to by men—– and I do think that men have a certain amount of privilege in our society and that has resulted in a backlash against men. I study domestic violence, in fact teach courses on it, and I am unusual in teaching about violence against men. Many people would like to take away my right to call myself a liberal feminist because I teach such things… I had an argument with another professor recently because I suggested that we are doing everyone a disservice when we fail to address the use of violence by women in intimate relationships. The mainstream position is that if women are using violence it is in reponse to male violence and when men are violent they cause more physical harm to the woman (because they are stronger physically) and therefore it is more of a problem. Many academics dismiss the studies that show women endorse the use of violent tactics in their relationships to the same extent as men… but when we do recognize it we must also remember that these same studies show that men are committing the more violent acts that result in serious harm. This does not mean that it is not just as crucial that we provide services for men that have been abused but we need to fully address the problem of violence in relationships. The problem with the current perspective is that it completely shuts down dialogue between men and women about the problems of violence and how to address them. Instead we have one size fits all approaches and stop gap measures to dealing with it. If women want equality in relationships and the workplace then we must also recognize that they are just as capable of violent acts as men. They are just as capable of being dispicable at the end of a relationship as a man and to manipulate the system more out of revenge than anything else. If I had a child, I would never want to stop that child from having a loving, healthy relationship with their father. But I guess my question is why hate women? As I said, I have been hurt by men, one damn near destroyed me, and I do not hate men nor think that every man in the world is responsible for the bad behavior of some. Radical feminist positions have failed both men and women because they paint both genders with such broad strokes— as if all women and all men fell into some predicatable categorical construct. The only way change will happen is through meaningful dialogue between genders as opposed to one side hating the other.
March 6th, 2007 at 12:34 am
Actually, from what I’ve seen, the internet sites carry an average cross-section of American men. Sure, there are guys I wouldn’t meet unless I had a drink at a biker bar, attended a Star Trek gathering or taught sky diving. We pass people by all the time; what’s different? You just have to be selective. …and it would be really good to have self-control… I hear… lol
March 5th, 2007 at 10:30 pm
I have some sympathy for the plight of the ‘average’ women, as I will continue to refer to the bulk of women, but that sympathy is limited.
My father’s generation fought a bloody war against Fascism and I fought against communism. I now get along fine with Germans and Japanese and Italians and the rest, largely because they recanted their fascism and paid reparations for their damage. They ‘made good’. That is, the average person in the street in those countries paid via their taxes, their public utterances, their acceptance of responsibility for their complicity in the cause of the carnage. Even if in part. Some still rankle, like the Japanese who seem obliviously ignorant about the horrors that their country imposed on others. Generally though, I live in peace and harmony with them and even like many.
Women are in the same boat. ALL women. The femi-war is still being fought. Just wait till it hots up. You ain’t seen nothin’ yet. Women show complete contempt for men most of the time. Very rarely do I hear a woman defending men. Frankly when the occasional woman does defend men, defend truth, defend fairness, – as Teri does – and condemns the rabid hatred of men displayed by other women, and by other men in their thrall, I say ‘Thank you’. I recognise the ‘Good German’ in them. But they are rare. Most women rip off men horrendously and blame the men for it. Its like Germans blaming Jews for everything.
When women (that’s the bulk, the average en masse) start to actively counter the hatred-spewing women (and men) and actively fight against them, then, and only then, will I see them as anything but an implacable enemy to be fought. As with the German in the home, working to put bread on the table, do the washing, clean the house, raise a family, they get the bombs raining down on them and I have some sympathy. Limited. Some, many, sent their children into the Hitler Youth to be indoctrinated. It was they who started it, supported it, encouraged it, and they reap what they sow.
Men haven’t even started ‘raining bombs’ on women. That’s only because of mens’ incredible patience and tolerance, frankly. But that’s running out and the bomb-factories are gearing up. If women do not want that to happen, then now is the time to start aplogising and making restitution.
When the women gather together to plot the destruction of the leaderships of Feminism, as some Germans tried to assassinate Hitler, then I will see some hope. Until then women can hardly expect men to want to be in their lives. It is of no use at all for the average woman to complain that she cannot find a husband when for most of her life she has been encouraging a war against men.
Women will have to recant their Feminism and pay reparations. They will have to DESTROY feminism, not defend it. Not make excuses for this part or that. Hitler built autobahns and got the trains running on time but that is hardly a balance for the destruction caused. The average German felt pretty good about themselves, just as Womyn do, until the price had to be paid. Their arrogance soaked into the ground with their blood.
The average woman needs to put things right with men. Pay the cost. Themselves. Not from taxes levied on their husbands. Before it is too late and a more bloody cost is levied.
For those women who ply themselves on ‘Singles’ boards, I say ‘Tough’. What on earth do you expect?
Women, the average woman, has been saying that there are no good men out there. So what do you expect to find? Bad ones? “All men are Rapists’ has been the gleeful catchcry of feminists, supported by Ms Average for so long now. Do you really seek happiness from a rapist? Women seem all too happy to call men Jerks, then whine when men say ‘well, f*ck off then’. For the woman who fights men’s corner -like Teri – who uses a singles bord, Teri, you are not going to find anything there. Your friends have peed on the carpet. There are only pee-sniffers there.
Real Men don’t like the smell.
March 5th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
For my experiences, it’s clearly the lack of reality testing that gals have with men, and lack of reality training that they get now. I for one advocate a marriage strike out of concern for being victimized yet again by someone who agrees to a set of rules then wants to renegotiate. Fine. I’m out of that deal altogether as Uncle suborns that game and clearly profits by it. I marvel at the gals I deal with, who claim they agree with my views on marriage as a legal institutions, who subsequently tire of only the lack of a piece of paper and upon finding only that I hold my priniciples steadfast, choose to walk away mad from substantial emotional and financial security because they thought I could be induced to gift them de jur with my worldly goods in exchange for emotional and physical vaporware and no guarantee whatsoever. My willingness to stick to what I had vowed and they had agreed to at the outset in the absense of anything else was what did it. Things will only get worse til reality is taught again in this land, and that responsibility by all parties be required, where those that fail to adhere to their utterings as a matter of routine be held at fault and assessed blame, male or female, by resonable evaluation of their conduct against their promises.
Never happen, of course, marriage was once all about survival at one point, not pleasure, so seeking happiness as an evaluator of marital success is a highway to dissatisfaction because continued happines is statisticall unlikely regardless the relationship type or components…
March 5th, 2007 at 12:30 pm
What a lot of the fellows here have been trying to do is to pound (not “drill”, but literally beat) through your denial system (and showing far more patience about it than you realize, not the least bit surprising to most men) is that –
1) more and more men do see women as the enemy, and
2) an ever growing number of men really don’t care about “average, innocent women, women like” you. These are precisely the women who have ruined the lives of countless men, mostly by using men’s caring about them as a weapon to use against men.
It is, in fact, these alleged “average, innocent women” who are the ones who have done most of the work to alienate average men from average women. As they have lapped up their daily dosages of Oprah, LifetimeTV, and all the other forms of emotional road-kill which seem to be the favorite diet of Western Woman, they have slowly drifted into isolated self-centered worlds and ceased to care about anything other than what gratifies them right now.
Recently, a former feminist reflected on the “scorched social landscape” which she and her sistahood had left in their rush to self-gratification. These average women you mention are anything but innocent, and the attempts to blame the destruction which has come from their actions on outside agents like “family courts” strangely echoes the absolute refusal of these average women to take any responsibility whatsoever for their actions or the consequences.
And, why not? It has worked so well for so long, that it isn’t surprising that slow learners would take a very long time to figure out that it has slowly begun to fail to work.
The father’s rights guys you are attempting to “sell” to these “average innocent women” are only a small subset of men fed up with feminism. The message which the rest of them keep trying to push past your denial system is that most of them see nothing at all to gain from “winning over the average woman”. In fact, it is the average woman who has a lot more to gain by abandoning her feminist ideas. Forget finding a “husband” in today’s climate – more and more women my age are having enough trouble finding a man who will even date them. I work with a woman about my age who has not had a man ask her out since 1999.
For her, expecting to be “won over” amounts to pricing herself completely out of the market.
March 5th, 2007 at 1:10 am
“Welcome to the other side”
—Thank you. I’m truly honored.
“you still at some level, align yourself with the sistahood.”
—Depends what you mean by sisterhood. as a female, yes, by all means. There is one area in which I often lament I’m not male; but besides that, menses, and childbirth, I’m pretty happy being female. In fact, in at least one area I’m thrilled to be female.
“Let me use a sports analogy here. You either play for Michigan or Ohio State. You either play for the Red Sox or the Yankees.”
—I understand that’s how it is for you . I even understand that you might believe it has to be that way for me, for everyone. I believe this is going to be one of those things that we’ll never agree on. I’m OK with that. I hope you are. I hate that people pick sides. Think how efficient the govt, including family law and domestic violence law reform, would be if everyone decided each issue independently.
“We men have been sold the bill of goods known as “equality†for 40 years.”
—The thing you speak of is radical feminism. Maybe we should call it Victim Feminism. Average women are learning what these rads have done, and I have faith with their help we’ll turn this back around and settle smack down in the middle. Anything else is unacceptable. I have some experience taking the message to average women, and from what I’ve seen, they’re appalled and supportive. You see, many average women know a male who sees the gorilla’s shadow.
“This is a war. ”
—I fear you see it as men against all women in general and all feminism. I see it as a war of individuals and families against the govt. and radical feminists.
“Look at some of the responses here. These are real men, in real pain, with their lives blown apart. Just because it isn’t on the evening news doesn’t make it any less real.”
—I know. I have many friends and a son who have, or who are now experiencing, all or some of the things in my article. I’m blessed that some of them share their thoughts with me.
Plus, I went through a similar thing involving the govt trying to use me for income when I had a failed adoption. I was shocked at the injustice and lack of assistance. I tried every normal option to solve the multiple govt-caused problems, and some off-the-wall things, all to no avail. This happened simultaneously with my marriage ending, a 20-year friendship ending suddenly and my home loan foreclosing. It was an awful time.
Medically this threw me into severe, chronic depression and stress-induced allergies that until I self-diagnosed, caused severe headaches lasting 7 days, 24 hours a day, even on medication. It took me several years to heal emotionally and physiologically and and get off medication. I even heard my voice, in my head, say the word suicide once. I’ve been to despair and desperation. I realized the other night that I purposely keep myself emotionally detached from the pain of all but a select few; that because I’m such a feeling and empathetic person I can’t handle feeling their pain. It can trigger my depression, and I can’t have that.
“Stop taking their comments personally. If the men here want to paint women with a broad brush SO WHAT? Why should you care?”
—It’s not that I’m taking them personally. I know how you guys write. It’s not about me.
One of my goals is to reverse the extremely negative reputation the Fathers’ Movement has. Like it or not, you, it, are judged by the tone of your comments. What else do they have to go by unless they dig deeper? And the radicals eat it up. They quote you in their communications to legislators.
‘At least you are getting a dialogue.’
—And I hope each of you know how much I appreciate it. I love learning about men. I’ve been blessed. And I can’t help feeling special; there aren’t many women like me.
‘If you go grammar nazi over generalizations men will tire of it and dismiss you.’
—I totally get this in normal everyday conversation! I was doing that in an attempt to protect the fathers’ movement’s reputation.
‘Yours is a burden that you and other women that get involved with this movement will have to carry.’
—I wouldn’t change a thi… I wouldn’t change too many things.
Would you rather we bobblehead the situation?
–what does that mean?
“That won’t get the gravel shoveled.”
—now that’s a sexy line right there.
“Are you doing this for a greater good or for pats on the back?’
—I’m driven by a passionate need to right this wrong that harms children, fathers and mothers. I do feel very proud when I do a good job. Being self-employed, I don’t get a lot of praise from people over 4. I’m very pleased with my progress as a writer. advocate and activist. Other than righting these wrongs, I suppose the only other thing I want, would be a new job, writing, doing PR, activism, something like that. I do child care for the good vibes, not because it pays well. Like a lot of you, I struggle at times, and just make it most of the time.
“you make it difficult for us to applaud you when we vent and you go into “defense modeâ€
–thank you for telling me this. I’ll try to watch my wording.
“We really don’t care what women think/feel or their issues are.”
—I understand that as far as the things feminists say are women’s feelings and issues. I hope that you, like the friends I have around the world, in your shoes, care about average, innocent women, women like me. I’m only here because my early mentors, *ssholes that a few of them were, put up with my ignorance for a very long time. I want you to win-over the average woman. To do that you should offer her a hand in patience…
I’d like to hit that animal with a very strong knock-out drug and send him back to where he came from. Since I can’t, I’ll keep kicking at his heels and warning others to beware.
By the way…If any of you are 40-60, single, dating and looking for a long-term, monogamous relationship…you can find my profile on several sites. I’m looking for a good man. You know, an average guy. If you’re interested, I’m OneOfAKindInCali.
: )
Teri