Showing posts with label fatherhood. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fatherhood. Show all posts

09 February 2011

It’s All About the Power and Control, I Mean the Kids - Part Three

“If you want to change the culture, you will have to start by changing the organization.” ~ Mary Douglas (1921-2007)

Monday and Tuesday I gave you my opinion about the Father’s rights Movement, that I think it may have started out as some good fathers and men attempting to make their children’s lives better.  I said that I believe abusers have taken that over and ultimately made children’s lives worse through the Family Court System.

After all, it is abusers that want to maintain power and control of their victims and could care less about what is really best for their kid’s.  They will twist everything so that it appears to those they are manipulating that the victim is the one in the wrong or that the victim is the abuser.

Today, I felt it was only fair to discuss the various avenues that a truly good father can take to protect him and his children.  I’ve already stated that I don’t believe that just being a parent (whether mom or dad) makes a person a good parent.  There are men out there that are abused by women and there are kids out there that are abused by moms.

Most of the time men that abused will not seek help; mainly for the same reasons a woman won’t, but with the added social embarrassments that women don’t have.  What will their friends and family think about them ‘letting’ a woman abuse?  Men are most often not believed either; by friends, family, and professionals.

The reason for these two additional factors is because the way society as a whole thinks about gender.  A man doesn’t ‘let’ himself be abused anymore than a woman ‘lets’ herself be abused.  No abuse victim wants to be abused, in any way, regardless of what type of abuse it is.  An abuser can gain power and control of their victim in many different ways and the victim rarely sees this happening until it is too late.

When a man finds himself the victim of domestic violence or abuse and seek help they often find no services geared specifically for men.  The main reason for this is that most men (not all) are not abused to the point that they can no longer provide for themselves or that their lives are in physical danger.  The shelters that are set up to help women can’t house abused men in with abused women for many reasons, mainly because many abusers attempt to play themselves off as victims to gain entrance into a shelter to find their victims... horrifying!  But also because most shelters are not set up for co-habitation between males and females.

Organizations and shelters can however still help men that need that help.  The can help them by providing emergency assistance with vouchers for hotel for a couple nights for their safety, this is one of the things a man would have to know to ask for though... even most women don’t know to ask for a voucher when told the shelter is full.

Men can also call the National Domestic Violence Hotline for Men and Women at 1.888.743.5754 to ask for advice and help in their particular situation.  Online a man can go any of these sites (which I found here):

I would suggest that any man who is a victim of domestic violence visit An Abuse, Rape and Domestic Violence Aid and Resource Collection:  http://www.aardvarc.org/dv/malevictims.shtml  There are a lot of good resources there that can help a man and their children.

There are good fathers out there, I just want them to be able to help themselves and their children without getting sucked into the FR Movement.  After all abusers can manipulate anyone, that is what makes them good at lying in court and getting their way, rather than the best interest of their child being protected by the court.

Enhanced by Zemanta



08 February 2011

It’s All About the Power and Control, I Mean the Kids - Part Two

“Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self.” ~ Cyril Connolly (1903-1974)

Ok, so with that thought in mind I move on to part two of this topic, and oh yes there will be a part three... just don’t you worry. 

As I was saying in part one, the people who make up the Father’s Rights Movement may not have started out where they have ended up.  They originally may have been honestly good fathers and what they have morphed into is the result of many abusers jumping onboard and running away with the movement.

Along these lines the men in the FR Movement have touted and tried to throw in the face of all women (feminists, non-feminists, mothers and every one really) a quote from Gloria Steinem... attempting to ‘prove’ that even SHE sees their side of it, that fathers need to be equal in parenting...  FR’s go on with that thought regardless of whether or not the father is abusive.

The quote I’m referring to is:  “Women can't be equal outside the home until men are equal in it.”

As far as I can find Gloria Steinem actually said this sentence twice, once in an interview published in the NY Daily News and once in an article she wrote which was published in the Opinion Section of the LA Times.  The LA Times article is no longer available but I found the article copied here, so that I can still reference it.

In both cases the FR Movement refuses to take the quote in the context of what she was actually saying.  Taking shit out of context is one of my biggest pet peeves and in this case shows how totally twisted they have actually gotten it.

In the interview, which was for the occasion of her 75th birthday, she was speaking in a general sense of women’s equality.  What she actually said was: 

“We’ve demonstrated that women can do what men do, but not yet that men can do what women do. That’s why most women have two jobs — one inside the home and one outside it — which is impossible. The truth is that women can’t be equal outside the home until men are equal in it.”

In the article she wrote for the LA Times she was speaking about Sarah Palin running for VP.  What she actually said was: 

Being a hope-a-holic, however, I can see two long-term bipartisan gains from this contest.

Republicans may learn they can't appeal to right-wing patriarchs and most women at the same time. A loss in November could cause the centrist majority of Republicans to take back their party, which was the first to support the Equal Rights Amendment and should be the last to want to invite government into the wombs of women.

And American women, who suffer more because of having two full-time jobs than from any other single injustice, finally have support on a national stage from male leaders who know that women can't be equal outside the home until men are equal in it. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are campaigning on their belief that men should be, can be and want to be at home for their children.

She wasn’t saying that men should be equal in the home, thus supporting fathers being caregivers to young children then turning around and abusing them because they are not equipped to handle it.  What she is saying is that women have TWO jobs, which are impossible to juggle from a man’s point of view... but that women do it everyday.

Yes, she does state that Obama and Biden were campaigning on their belief that men should, can and want to be home for their kids.  She did NOT say she supports that... she specifically used the words “their belief”. 

So, Father’s Rights Activists.... I ask you this, where exactly does Gloria Steinem say you should be allowed to stay home and not work while your children’s mom does and pays you child support to abuse your kids?  I must have missed that.

I still stick to my opinion that most of those in the FR Movement are abusers trying to cram their ideological patriarchal power and control down everyone else’s throats.

Enhanced by Zemanta



07 February 2011

It’s All About the Power and Control, I Mean the Kids

Everyday we all hear about or read about divorcing couples fighting over who gets the kids.  Fighting over their own children like they are some sort of property to be traded back and forth.  There are many people that believe ALL mothers should always have custody with very little to no visitation for fathers; and likewise there are those out there that believe the opposite, ALL fathers should get custody and mothers should get little to no visitation.

Personally I don’t see how so many people can see this issue in such black and white terms.  Not ALL mothers are good parents and not ALL fathers are good parents.  For the most part the daily news will show us that most child abuse and child murders are committed by fathers, and yes, occasionally by mothers.  This still doesn’t prove that ALL fathers are bad or good or that ALL mothers are bad or good.

In the last few years I have learned more about the Father’s Rights Movement, and I can say that I’m more than a little shocked at what I’ve learned.  The Father’s Rights Advocates would have everyone believe that they are just concerned for fathers as a whole having shared or joint custody.  They would have us believe that their number one concern is actually the children in divorces and custody cases.  On the surface if one doesn’t dig too much that sounds wonderful.

However, when looked at further it is easily seen what the real agenda is for the Father’s Rights Movement.  The further abuse and victimization of their ex-wives and children.  Before I go any further here, I’d like to point out that I fully believe that good fathers have

sought out the assistance of the Father’s Rights Movement and one of two things happens... they either leave, frustrated and still alone in their plight OR they become enmeshed in the bitterness which abounds.

What I see out of Father’s Rights Advocates around the internet appears to be mostly just a bunch of men (and a few women that will do anything to get the attention or have a little power for themselves) who have been abusive in one way or another to the mother of their children and now feel that comfy rug of power and control being ripped from under their feet. 

What better way to continue to abuse and control your victim when they walk away than to take possession of their children?

One main reason that I’ve formed the opinion that I have of the Father’s Rights Movement is because only abusers would look at the news we see of fathers murdering and abusing their kids and deny that it happens, or make excuses for it happening.  The strict adherence to the ‘ALL fathers should have custody’ line that they feed everyone is the basis of my opinion that the majority of those in the movement are abusers grasping at keeping the power and control they had.

Here is an example, mind you... this is only one search, but there are many like this.

VISITOR ANALYSIS

Referrer
http://www.google.com/m?q=do wifes come back after losing custody?&start=20&sa=N

Search Engine Phrase
do wifes come back after losing custody?

Search Engine Name
Google

Search Engine Host
www.google.com

Host Name
74-82-64-35.rdns.blackberry.net

IP Address
74.82.64.35
[Label IP Address]

Country
United States

Why would someone look for this?  Other than because they are contemplating attempting to gain custody through the Family Court just to get their ex-wife back under their power.  This doesn’t sound like a man who loves his kids and wants the best for them, this sounds like a man who loves control and will use whatever means available to him to maintain or re-gain his power and control.

I never meant for this to be this long, so I will wrap this up by saying... not ALL men should have access to their children regardless of what the FR Advocates say.  Likewise, I can admit that not ALL women that give birth are the best parent choice either.  The natural equipment that we are born with which enables us to create life does NOT dictate how a person will be as a parent.

Since it is obvious that I have much more to say about this... there will be other posts on this subject.

 




16 June 2010

Let’s Look to the Animal World for Paternal Bonding

I found this article to be very interesting and thus wanted to share it with all of you...enjoy!

 

Paternal Bonds, Special and Strange

By NATALIE ANGIER

Published: June 14, 2010

Not long ago, Julia Fischer of the German Primate Center in Göttingen was amused to witness two of her distinguished male colleagues preening about a topic very different from the standard academic peacock points — papers published, grants secured, competitors made to look foolish.

RSS Feed

RSS Get Science News From The New York Times »

Enlarge This Image

Stefanie Henkel

STATUS SYMBOL An adult male Barbary macaque at La ForĂȘt des Singes, a zoo in Rocamadour, France, comforts an infant, and impresses his fellow males.

Readers' Comments
Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

“One of them said proudly, ‘I have three children,’ ” Dr. Fischer recalled. “The other one replied, ‘Well, I have four children.’

“Some men might talk about their Porsches,” she added. “These men were boasting about their number of children.” And while Dr. Fischer is reluctant to draw facile comparisons between humans and other primates, she couldn’t help thinking of her male Barbary macaques, for whom no display carries higher status, or is more likely to impress the other guys, than to strut around the neighborhood with an infant monkey in tow.

Reporting in the current issue of the journal Animal Behaviour, Dr. Fischer and her co-workers describe how male Barbary macaques use infants as “costly social tools” for the express purpose of bonding with other males and strengthening their social clout. Want to befriend the local potentate? Bring a baby. Need to reinforce an existing male-male alliance, or repair a frayed one? Don’t forget the baby.

It doesn’t matter if the infant is yours or not. Just so long as it has the downy black fur and wrinkly pinkish face that adult male macaques find impossible to resist. “They will hold up the infant like a holy thing, nuzzling it, chattering their teeth,” Dr. Fischer said. “It can be a bit bewildering to see.”

Just in time for Father’s Day come this and other recent studies that reveal surprising, off-road or vaguely unsettling cases of Males Behaving Dadly — attending to the young with an avidity and particularity long thought to be the province of the mother.

Scientists have learned, for example, that the male pipefish — which, like his seahorse relatives, famously becomes pregnant and gives birth to live young — is both more generous and more calculatedly harsh toward his offspring than previously believed, able to fine-tune the flow of nutrients to his gestating babies depending on how he feels about their mother.

In most species of birds, males and females take turns incubating the eggs and fetching insects for the fledglings. But among some large, flightless birds like emus and rheas, the male is often the sole keeper of the nest. Scientists now have evidence that such father-focused child care may represent the primordial avian program, one that dates back to the birds’ storied ancestors, the dinosaurs.

Why do males of some species attend to their offspring prolongedly, while others tend to spring off post-coitally? The reasons vary widely and are not always easy to discern.

In 90 percent of mammalian species, promiscuity is common and paternity uncertain; females gestate the young internally and then provision them with breast milk, and males rarely have any evolutionary incentive to play Ward Cleaver. Yet in that remaining 10 percent, the daddy decile, we find most of the world’s primates.

“Lots of primates are suckers for babies,” said Sarah Hrdy, the primatologist and author of “Mothers and Others” (Harvard University Press, 2009). Consider how the male of two small New World monkey species, the cotton-top tamarin and the common marmoset, reacts to a mate’s pregnancy.

His hormones change, the dendritic connections in his brain begin to change, and he puts on weight — all in preparation for the heavy lifting to come. Female marmosets and tamarins generally give birth to twins, which together weigh about 20 percent of what the father does, and from the moment the babies are born until they reach independence, the male will be expected to carry them most of the time. If he’s sitting, he’ll hold them on his lap. While he’s swinging through the trees, the twins will cling to the comforting thermal pads between his shoulder blades. If he hears the babies crying, he can’t help himself — he must fetch them and pick them up.

In a study that appeared in the American Journal of Primatology, Sofia Refetoff Zahed and her colleagues at the University of Wisconsin compared the responses of experienced fathers and inexperienced males when confronted with the sound of a fussy infant monkey coming from a distant cage.

Without exception, the experienced fathers would quickly cross a bridge to reach the source of the distress cry, arriving within 45 seconds. Inexperienced males, by contrast, took their time. A minute, five minutes, wah wah wah! Oh well, guess I’d better see what the problem is. Or not. In half the cases, the inexperienced males never made it to the stimulus cage before the experiment was up.

Marmosets and tamarins become dream daddies because their partners are queen bees of fecundity. A mother monkey can’t possibly handle the energetics of lugging around a pair of growing twins. Not when she is expected both to produce a double dose of milk and to become pregnant again roughly two weeks after giving birth.

“When I first started watching the monkeys, I thought the females were so mean,” said Ms. Zahed, who is working on her doctorate. “The infants would try to get food, to get whatever the mother had, and the mom would grab it back and go away. The dad, on the other hand, would give up his food and let the infants get away with anything.

“Then I got pregnant with my second child while I was still nursing the first,” she added. “Then I understood. You do get grouchy.”

In contrast to the obvious link between paternal care and offspring welfare seen in tamarins and marmosets, a male Barbary macaque’s fascination with infants can look less than kid-friendly. Once abundant throughout North Africa, but now limited to forest patches in Algeria and Morocco, these monkeys live in troops of some 30 animals, a mix of related adult females and unrelated adult males. Females give birth in the spring, and Dr. Fischer said, spring “is high season for infant dealing.”

Within days of being born, every infant is fair game for male pawings. “A male will approach a mother slowly,” Dr. Fischer said, “seize the moment, and take the infant.” He will carry the infant under his belly, or in his arms, and he’ll advance toward one or two other males and start to make nice.

“If they don’t have an infant, they can’t interact,” Dr. Fischer said. “There would be too much tension between them.” A male may hold on to an infant for hours at a stretch. If the baby starts to cry, he may take it back to the mother for a feeding, all the while hanging on to the ankle of his precious networking tool.

The researchers initially assumed that baby handling might have a tranquilizing effect on the males, but on measuring the macaques’ hormone levels, they found the opposite: carrying an infant caused a male’s stress hormones to spike. The scientists now propose that the males use the infants as “battle symbols,” as Dr. Fischer put it, “to show other males that they can bear the stress.”

What better proof of a worthy ally, who will not wilt come breeding season — when males must form coalitions to monopolize fertile females and help spawn the next generation of fuzzy handheld devices?

Nature may never have invented the wheel, but she’s the original wheeler-dealer and hedger of bets. The pouch of a male pipefish was long thought to be a passive incubator in which embryos could develop safely while feasting on yolky nutrients the mother had supplied. Recent research suggests that the male also infuses the pouch with plenty of food, not to mention regulating osmotic pressure, salinity and oxygen flow.

Paternal generosity does have its limits. In a report published in the March 18 issue of Nature, Kimberly A. Paczolt and Adam G. Jones of Texas A&M University showed that the pouch of a gulf pipefish is a staging ground for sexual barters and the occasional war.

Male pipefish like big females, and if they mate with a meaty one, they will lavish her eggs with abundant nutrients of their own. But if a male ends up mating with a lightweight because she was the best he could find, and midway through gestation a fatter female swims by, the male’s pouch knows what to do: abort or reabsorb a few existing embryos to use as food for the new.

Yes, fathers love to take charge, beat the odds, expand the nest. Reporting in the journal Science , David J. Varricchio of Montana State University and his colleagues offered evidence that for at least some species of birdlike carnivorous dinosaurs, fathers may have been the ones who cared for their young.

The researchers argued that to begin with, the repeated discovery of adult dinosaurs in close proximity to egg clutches indicated that dinosaurs didn’t just dump and dash, turtle style, but instead stuck around to protect the nest. What’s more, the total volume of each clutch was impressively large, suggesting input from more than one female.

Finally, the bones of the adults associated with the nests suggested that their owner might well have been male. A male that invited many females to mate with him and lay their heavy treasures in his nest. He was a good father. They had done their part. Now he would do the rest.

Enhanced by Zemanta