Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Kathleen Parker :: Townhall.com Columnist
Calling All Fathers - And Mothers, Too
by Kathleen Parker
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


WASHINGTON -- Barack Obama's recent call for responsible fatherhood is welcome, overdue -- and misleadingly incomplete.

That America's fathers need to embrace their most important role is no secret. Activist fathers have been trying to make the same claim for decades, without much success.

Not all fathers are trying to be good dads, it goes without saying. But neither are all absent by choice, as Obama's message implied.

His plea to fathers came on Father's Day, a time we usually reserve for praising good men. Noting the plague of fatherless homes, he called on fathers who have abandoned their responsibilities to act like men, not boys.

Hear, hear.

We pause briefly to ponder the kind of response Obama might have received had he decided to criticize negligent moms on Mother's Day. No one in his right mind would do such a thing, but we're so accustomed to dissing dads that even a Father's Day reprimand leaves America's eyelashes unruffled.

Double standards are sometimes allowed for the greater good. We cut Obama slack because his message is so urgent. We also know that the African-American community has been hardest hit by father absence. In Obama's words:

"We know that more than half of all black children live in single-parent households, a number that has doubled -- doubled -- since we were children. We know the statistics -- that children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime; nine times more likely to drop out of schools and 20 times more likely to end up in prison. They are more likely to have behavioral problems, or run away from home or become teenage parents themselves. And the foundations of our community are weaker because of it."

Obama is right on all of the above, but the stats are even worse. More than 70 percent of black children are born out of wedlock. Since 1960, we've tripled the number of American children living in fatherless homes, from 8 million to 24 million. The population as a whole increased just 1.7 times during that period.

What Obama fails to mention is that the problem of absent fathers, especially in the black community, is tied in part to well-intentioned social programs such as those the presumptive Democratic nominee intends to expand -- domestic violence prevention and child support collections.

As I point out in my book, "Save the Males: Why Men Matter; Why Women Should Care," cracking down on deadbeats is one of those guaranteed applause-getters, but most of the fathers of whom Obama is speaking make less than $10,000 a year -- or are unemployed.

Throwing them in jail won't help children much, either financially or psychologically. The truth, meanwhile, seems unwelcome in political circles: Most employed men pay their child support in full and on time, and always did, without government prodding.

Similarly furthering the public impression that only men are guilty of domestic violence is counterproductive if the goal is truly to bring fathers home. That's because as the system is currently set up, men lose all legal rights to home and children if a woman charges assault. The accused is guilty until proven innocent.

Clearly, the state has a compelling interest in protecting women and children from abusive men -- where they exist. But not all charges are legitimate and the state's punitive powers, permitted without due process, are mind-boggling to consider. Once the system is engaged and injunctions issued, even innocent fathers are unlikely to see much of their children. Perhaps never.

On Mother's Day, we didn't hear much about women initiating domestic violence, including child abuse, though some studies show that they do more often than men. That's not a popular statistic for the good reason that women more often than men suffer grave injury and are killed in physical disputes.

Those two dueling facts highlight the lose-lose nature of the domestic violence debate. But if prevention of violence and preservation of the family are indeed our goals, then the solution involves focusing on the causes of family violence, including women's role, not promising to make things tougher only on fathers.

Changing the system won't be easy, but Obama is uniquely positioned to make a difference in the conversation. He should begin by saying that bringing fathers back into the family means ending the demonization of men and the culture's trivialization of fatherhood.

That would be a change we could believe in.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Kathleen Parker is a syndicated columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Kathleen Parker's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Right On!
Men in our culture are nothing more than walking wallets for women.

Women need to be responsible too.
There is an article in American Thinker today about women and the role they play in absentee fathers. This is the part of the story that is not told. Women need to stop having babies by men to whom they are not married to and then would not have to worry about the man being around. Being married is no guarantee that the man will be responsible, but at least it's something, rather than just having babies with the man not being fully on board with the relationship or the pregnancy.

I have seen this drama played out many times. I have several friends who had babies with men to whom they were not married or even in an exclusive relationship with, hoping this would make the man stay with them. Unfortunately, the baby didn't change the man's mind and the women are raising the children alone, albeit with some financial support, but certainly not the paternal input that occurs within a nuclear family. The saddest part is that the people I personally know are women in their 30's, not teenagers.

I don't know how marriage before kids got so devalued in our society, but I think it's a problem that needs to be talked about more.

When the men revolt....

it won't be pretty. I am thinking the social security crunch, circa 2020, will lead to a total elimination of the welfare state. Then we will have an interesting situation...

Women used to say no
If someone does not commit to you then what are you doing letting him have his way with you!! Nutty, isn't it? Children with fairly decent parents have issues and see shrinks. Can you imagine a child born out of wedlock to a teenager with no life experience, no parenting skills and not having a father. We see them all over. Hanging on the street corners with their pants down to their knees - not working, not caring and probably selling drugs as their "job". Like my friend in CA says: I don't like their culture!

Fathers
Very well said!

Re: Is he kidding!!!
EVERYTIME this man opens his mouth he make absolutely NO sense yet his followers hang on every word like he's their savior OMGOODNESS!!!When he stated he had visited 57 states and didn't make a correction it was accepted and now this about his Dad GIVE ME A BREAK!!!! Read about dear ole Dad Obama it's an eye opener. Perhaps b/c of his Dad is why NO one can use his middle name HUSSEIN.He has disowned his white side of his family. This man is dangerous for our country.
Nancy Houston,TX

Hi Nancy!
Obama is nobody I'd vote for, being socialist/Democrat and a hopeless naif to boot, but when he's right, he's right, even if he doesn't complete the message.

Fathers have been too long dissed in this society and frankly it's a wonder that any man, no matter his skin tone, would still willingly step up to the responsibilities these days!

For all the liberals' sneering at the "Leave It To Beaver" stereotypes one wonders if "Murphy Brown" is really any better at representing reality. I'd say no, but then I'm a gal who's still married to my first husband for 29 years, and none of our kids were born on the wrong side of the blanket, so what would I know?!

Obama
He is spouting empty platitudes as his rhetoric does not match his policies.

I will give him credit in that he is taking pandering and populism to new heights the likes of which this country has never before seen.

REAL men... are scarce these days.

Real men seek real women; women who insist on a ceremony of marriage before engaging in an act of marriage.

Real men don't allow their wives and daughters to go out in public dressed like prostitutes.

Real men have one mother for their children rather than spreading their "seed" through as many sexual conquests as they can accomplish.

Real men give their children time and attention as well as money.

Real men are the product of being with real women. Women need to raise their standards and insist that men meet that high standard.

Women, step up! Men, follow God; don't follow your raging testosterone!

who's your daddy?
If this were the most important issue in the campaign, I would say vote for Bill Cosby, who is blacker, older and presumably wiser.
I know a girl (no lady) who is about 35, has three children by three different fathers, none of whom she married (or none of whom would have her), and has never worked a day in her life. She is the ultimate welfare mama. Besides being
incredibably lazy, she takes no interest in her kids' schoolwork, healthcare, or outside activities. And before you ask, she is white. Meanwhile all 3 of the Dads pay child support, and two of them make efforts to include the little punks in their weekend activities. So who's the real culprit here? It agrravates me more than you can imagine that this girl and her moneymakers have better health insurance than I do after I have worked for 40 years. We need someone (Is there a Teddy Roosevelt or a Harry Truman out there?) to stand up and say, "THAT'S JUST NOT RIGHT!!!!!!!!!" I hope that Obummer is that person, but doubt it very much.

I'm a non-white male..
AudiR10 and I wouldn't take a lesson from either of them, Cosby or Obama, and YOU have not the depth or understanding as to say what clue a non-white male should have, OR where they should come from.


BIGDODDY...
Enlighten us all.

Having rather more than a little experience in being the defacto-surrogate-male-figure in such situations, I would have to agree that Obama's pinning of 'the problem' on "Absentee Fathers", rather than "indiscriminate sperm-donors", leaves him having missed the mark.

So - what 'clue' do YOU think a non-white-male should have?

Where do YOU think they should be coming from?

- MuscleDaddy


few things wrong
wow I am appalled at this article. Mom my was beaten by her husband and the police did nothing. I can also name you 5 men in my small town, including my father, who were always late with child support, and they have great jobs. One of the men actually had to be threaten with jail time to get him to pay his 10 years or more in back child support. Thankfully I am not one of those stats mentioned in this article but to say that the abuser is guilty until proven innocent is wrong, at least in my mother's case.

Hey MuscleDaddy..pt 1
He shouldn't have made Father's Day the day to say ANYTHING negative about men (in general), not to mention taking this opportunity to rail on non-white men, amongst whom even the halfway decent ones (due to their portrayal in the media) are considered in "mainstream" America as violent, angry, oversexed, irresponsible, lazy, and untrustworthy.

The men and women who bring goodwill, or who are even remotely interested in restoring the family unit are already on board with the message, even outside of the political landscape. Nobody cares what he (or Bill Cosby) has to say about it.

What he did, by singling out non-white men is (in his OWN WORDS) "end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate" and general lack of respect for that group by people. When high profile non-whites rip each other apart and criticize them, it makes white people feel good, as if truly responsible non-white people sit around consoling losers and underachievers in the mix.

If his view and need to be paternal on us is the result of his own Father rolling out on them when he was younger, then he should say that, and use that as a fulcrum for his sentiment regarding ALL men - and keep it moving.

Not only Senator Obama, but if ANY person running for POTUS wants to pull this crap, don't do it on Fathers Day and don't single out any ONE group... bust the whole lot of them out while you're at it.

Maybe on Mother's day, he can rail on women who abort their babies (OOOPS...sorry WRONG candidate). Okay…rail on those who drown their babies in the bathtub or toss them in the dumpster or roll their car into a river somewhere.
(cont)

Hey MuscleDaddy...pt 2
We should also be mindful of whom we consider deadbeat as well. Just because a man does not live with his child doesn’t make him a deadbeat. Obama was saying that the “black” father is missing from the home over and over again. There are some “black” fathers who do not live in the home with their children but they do more for the children than a lot of custodial fathers (and mothers) do. I’m ONE of those fathers.

What about the fathers who DO live in the same home as their children and who are beating them, molesting them and neglecting them. Or what about the ones who are opening up a can of whoop-arse on the mothers on the regular, and who are Adulterers (ahem... Bill Cosby…) Wait, the deadbeat radar isn’t calibrated to detect those sorts of unsavory behaviors, is it?

Is a man who works 80-100 hours a week (like I used to) a deadbeat – or no? How about a man who is always on the road – traveling on business? Does that enable him to be there cheering on the children at all the sports events, fund-raisers, parent teacher meetings, or Doctors appointments.

I’ll cut him some slack, as he didn’t harp on it all that long, but he shoulda just kept mum with his pandering.

He’s quickly running to the middle, and I guess that’s good for moderates and bad news for liberals, but he’s far too two-faced for me. I’m still not going to forget how he got punked by the MSM over the Trinity/Jeremiah Wright matter.

And the clue..
..for me..comes from Scripture. Not any of these two jokers.

The best of all possible worlds, or not
A beautiful afternoon, sitting in the garden, admiring the sun glittering on water and off leaves of laurel. So I thought, this is the best of all possible worlds. Then I read this article, which addresses the unresolvable problems men visit on themselves, and I thought, this remains the best of all possible worlds, for I would not exchange my free will for some other world no matter how problem-free.

Absentee Fathers
Barack Hussein Obama is the last person who should have been talking about fathers.Where was his responsibility when taking his children for years to a racist anti-American ,so-called church to be brainwashed by a madman?

Also,he wants the Federal Government to pay men to be responsible.Doesn't the idiot know the government is the number one cause of absentee fathers already?

This man is not a brilliant person.He may be learned in some things,but he is just plain stupid without cue cards or teleprompters.

Even he should know when a government check is given if the dad is not there and taken away if he lives at home,that is an incentive for him to be absent.

Pay a man to be a father? How generous of him. Whose money does he plan to use to do this? Of course,money confiscated by duress from men who are already REAL FATHERS.

Calling all fathers -- Kathleen Parker
Federal legislation has put a bounty on fatherlessness in the inner cities for 40+ years. Financial aid to mothers has required a father to be absent. Multiple fathers, multiple children, one mother, no marriages; it worked. Too well. Social data directly and strongly links father absense with negative children outcomes. Now, in our suburbs, routinely court mandated father absense following divorce is the rule. Legislatively induced inner city fatherlessnes and court mandated suburbia post divorce fatherlessness are destroying our children's futures. This craziness must stop.

Preventable Fatherlessness
Federal legislation has put a bounty on fatherlessness in the inner cities for 40+ years. Financial aid to mothers has required a father to be absent. Multiple fathers, multiple children, one mother, no marriages; it worked. Too well. Social data directly and strongly links father absense with negative children outcomes. Now, in our suburbs, routinely court mandated father absense following divorce is the rule. Legislatively induced inner city fatherlessnes and court mandated suburbia post divorce fatherlessness are destroying our children's futures. This craziness must stop.

FAMILY VIOLENCE I
The feminist-driven “domestic violence industry” is part of an ever-expanding, tax-funded “bureaucracy of compassion” with its attendant caregivers, social workers, regulators, intellectuals and social scientists. Its use of the term “domestic violence” rather than the more gender-neutral “relationship violence” is based on the Marxist analysis of gender relations penned by Marx’s collaborator Friedrich Engels which presupposes a male 'oppressor' ("Within the family, man is the bourgeoisie, woman and children the proletariat") and a female ‘victim.’

Feminists with a strong emotional investment in the presumption of an oppressive patriarchy base their assessment of men as “the violent sex” on police, court, hospital and refuge data while waving away numerous academic studies implicating both sexes equally in relationship violence. These seriously troubled sisters will cite police blotter statistics and other official data to falsely conclude that relationship violence is a male problem ("That’s just part of how 'they' treat 'us' as women").

There are a number of compelling reasons why a man might be reluctant to complain to authorities that his wife assaulted him. These include fear of ridicule or being disbelieved; threats that if police are called his wife will level a counter-accusation and he'll be the one arrested by an establishment predisposed to take her part; a reluctance to walk out of the home that he probably paid for; the likelihood that access to his children will be denied by a gender-biased Family Court should he leave to escape the violence; and fears for the children's physical safety if he's no longer around to protect them from a violent mother.

FAMILY VIOLENCE II
One of the saddest accounts of male victimisation by a violent female was that of an army drill sergeant in the United States, who placed his gun in his mouth at the dinner table and blew his brains out in front of his family, after the contrast between his macho parade ground persona and the reality of his miserable existence became too much to bear.

The USA has a network of Women’s Refuges but not a single Man’s Refuge. And if a man did show up at a Women’s Refuge seeking relief from a violent female partner, do you think he’d be admitted? Like police blotter statistics, “refuge data” clearly have significant limitations in terms of providing an accurate picture of relationship violence in our community.

US researcher, Dr Martin Fiebert has examined 155 scholarly investigations, 126 empirical studies and 29 reviews and/or analyses in concluding that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 116,000 and can safely be regarded as statistically robust. Fiebert’s annotated bibliography, first published in Sexuality and Culture Volume 8, Number 3-4, Summer-Fall 2004, can be viewed online at http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm.

Contrary to the demonstrably false feminist picture of relationship violence, men and women are implicated in relationship violence in approximately equal numbers at all levels of severity as assessed by a standardised "Conflict Tactics Scale.” Both sexes are more or less equally represented in every category from throwing a teaspoon all the way up to murder. In some categories (e.g. punched, kicked, hit or slapped one's partner), female involvement slightly outstripped that of males.

FAMILY VIOLENCE III
Approximately one third of violent incidents were found to be "he assaults her," one third "she assaults him," and one third "they assault each other.” Most of what is categorised as "relationship violence" was found to be occasional, low level, and didn't result in serious injury, i.e. shoving, pulling, slapping, throwing small objects etc.

The most violent individuals, whether male or female, represent a tiny minority of those studied. Severely violent men typically used their fists and feet on spouses or partners. Severely violent women characteristically used weapons to even up the size difference or attacked spouses or partners when they were asleep or otherwise off-guard.

British family care activist, Erin Pizzey, who set up the first Women's Refuge in England in 1971, had a well-publicised falling out with the Sisterhood after she wrote a book claiming that many women presenting at her Chiswick Women's Refuge were "at least as violent as the men they had left behind" and self-admittedly addicted to the adrenalin rush they got from provoking violent reactions in their male partners, though few enjoyed the violence itself. These women were repeatedly and often seriously verbally and physically violent both to their own children and to other women in the shelter.

The foregoing analysis demonstrates conclusively that relationship violence is in fact a human problem, not a gender issue as the feminist movement would have us believe. It is long overdue for women as a group to acknowledge the female contribution to such violence rather than simply blaming males for something women are, on all the evidence, equally involved in.

FAMILY VIOLENCE I
The feminist-driven “domestic violence industry” is part of an ever-expanding, tax-funded “bureaucracy of compassion” with its attendant caregivers, social workers, regulators, intellectuals and social scientists. Its use of the term “domestic violence” rather than the more gender-neutral “relationship violence” is based on the Marxist analysis of gender relations penned by Marx’s collaborator Friedrich Engels which presupposes a male 'oppressor' ("Within the family, man is the bourgeoisie, woman and children the proletariat") and a female ‘victim.’

Feminists with a strong emotional investment in the presumption of an oppressive patriarchy base their assessment of men as “the violent sex” on police, court, hospital and refuge data while waving away numerous academic studies implicating both sexes equally in relationship violence. These seriously troubled sisters will cite police blotter statistics and other official data to falsely conclude that relationship violence is a male problem ("That’s just part of how 'they' treat 'us' as women").

FAMILY VIOLENCE II
There are a number of compelling reasons why a man might be reluctant to complain to authorities that his wife assaulted him. These include fear of ridicule or being disbelieved; threats that if police are called his wife will level a counter-accusation and he'll be the one arrested by an establishment predisposed to take her part; a reluctance to walk out of the home that he probably paid for; the likelihood that access to his children will be denied by a gender-biased Family Court should he leave to escape the violence; and fears for the children's physical safety if he's no longer around to protect them from a violent mother.

One of the saddest accounts of male victimisation by a violent female was that of an army drill sergeant in the United States, who placed his gun in his mouth at the dinner table and blew his brains out in front of his family, after the contrast between his macho parade ground persona and the reality of his miserable existence became too much to bear.

The USA has a network of Women’s Refuges but not a single Man’s Refuge. And if a man did show up at a Women’s Refuge seeking relief from a violent female partner, do you think he’d be admitted? Like police blotter statistics, “refuge data” clearly have significant limitations in terms of providing an accurate picture of relationship violence in our community.

FAMILY VIOLENCE III
US researcher, Dr Martin Fiebert has examined 155 scholarly investigations, 126 empirical studies and 29 reviews and/or analyses in concluding that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 116,000 and can safely be regarded as statistically robust. Fiebert’s annotated bibliography, first published in Sexuality and Culture Volume 8, Number 3-4, Summer-Fall 2004, can be viewed online at http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm.

Contrary to the demonstrably false feminist picture of relationship violence, men and women are implicated in relationship violence in approximately equal numbers at all levels of severity as assessed by a standardised "Conflict Tactics Scale.” Both sexes are more or less equally represented in every category from throwing a teaspoon all the way up to murder. In some categories (e.g. punched, kicked, hit or slapped one's partner), female involvement slightly outstripped that of males.

FAMILY VIOLENCE III
Approximately one third of violent incidents were found to be "he assaults her," one third "she assaults him," and one third "they assault each other.” Most of what is categorised as "relationship violence" was found to be occasional, low level, and didn't result in serious injury, i.e. shoving, pulling, slapping, throwing small objects etc.

The most violent individuals, whether male or female, represent a tiny minority of those studied. Severely violent men typically used their fists and feet on spouses or partners. Severely violent women characteristically used weapons to even up the size difference or attacked spouses or partners when they were asleep or otherwise off-guard.

British family care activist, Erin Pizzey, who set up the first Women's Refuge in England in 1971, had a well-publicised falling out with the Sisterhood after she wrote a book claiming that many women presenting at her Chiswick Women's Refuge were "at least as violent as the men they had left behind" and self-admittedly addicted to the adrenalin rush they got from provoking violent reactions in their male partners, though few enjoyed the violence itself. These women were repeatedly and often seriously verbally and physically violent both to their own children and to other women in the shelter.

FAMILY VIOLENCE IV
The foregoing analysis demonstrates conclusively that relationship violence is in fact a human problem, not a gender issue as the feminist movement would have us believe. It is long overdue for women as a group to acknowledge the female contribution to such violence rather than simply blaming males for something women are, on all the evidence, equally involved in.

Kathleen! Kudos!!
Thank you for writing an article addressing an issue that has been studiously ignored for too long! Sadly, I think this article will not get the full coverage it truly deserves, as it will be shouted down by rancorous, militant femi-nazis. Day after day I go to work in an office full of women whose first and last spoken phrase is "Typical man...". And afterward I go home to see commercials and news segments highlighting "womens health" while the only health care offered to men will treat "baldness, backsides and crotch". We have entire months dedicated to women's health, but there is no parity. When will women understand that they will find no equality in marginalizing and demonizing men?

THANK YOU FOR SPEAKING OUT!!!
My son has joint custody of his children, with the wife (primary custodian. She is in the military and used the children to get out of deploying to Iraq (all the men in her unit deployed). After the unit deployed, she promptly gave the children to their father to live. Making only $10.50 per hour he had to pay child support to her while supporting the children fully also - mother contributed NO support. Additionally, the Army gave her $500 a month specificially for the children - this was not given to the children either and the Army says that it's OK for her to keep this money to vacation on - Hawaii, Virginia, etc. I as a grandparent had to pick up what he could not pay - school clothes, supplies, food, etc. Think it's about time they looked at some of the laws and some of the mothers.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.