Saturday, March 11, 2017
Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party
Re: father-custody presumptions(@aol.com) [Author Profile]
Wednesday, April 16, 1997 06:46 AM PST
in-reply-to next reply raw thread [Post Reply]
The main difference between Fathers' Manifesto and David Blankenhorn's
"Fatherless America" (this includes The National Fatherhood Initiative, headed by Wade Horn and David Blankenhorn) is in approach. Fathers' Manifesto is an umbrella group for men's and fathers' rights organizations such as the Fathers United for Equal Rights, Men's Defense, COPS, the American Fathers Coalition, and the National Coalition for Free Men. There are both male and female members. Fathers' Manifesto sees women as inferior in all respects. It even sees women's smaller brain size as evidence that women are less intelligent and inferior to men. Such beliefs have been denounced since the turn of the century. It wants women completely under the control of men in all respects, especially in divorce. Children are chattel to be used as a bargaining chip. F_M approves of divorce as long as it doesn't cost the men and their new women anything, especially money. "Fatherless America" and NFI promote forced marriage. NFI sees problems in single mother homes and the high divorce rate as proof that women have abdicated their role in the family, and it pushes for fault divorce in order to keep women in their place. People with fundamentalist religious beliefs find NFI very appealing because of its claim to "strengthen marriage."
Both have used "fatherless homes" stats, but in different ways. F_M has used those stats in an attempt to "prove" that single mothers (and women in general) are not only inferior to men but are dangerous when raising children. "Fatherless America" and NFI have used those stats as a reason for pushing for fault divorce in order to make it more difficult for women to leave marriages. Both the book and the organization have used stats to
"prove" that marriage acts as a buffer against domestic violence. Blankenhorn really believes that marriage is a remedy for abuse because of his statistics showing that rates of physical abuse in marriage are lower than rates of physical abuse in non-married, hetero relationships without looking at particulars. "Fatherless America" isn't the only book to promote forced marriage. David Popenoe's "Life Without Father," another fave of the fathers' rights movement, has a similar view.
It's quite easy to tweak those "fatherless homes" stats due to the free-floating numbers, the lack of source material for the figures, and the lack of comparison of "fatherless homes" to any other type of home. You get to make your own interpretations. The initial view is that correlation (single mother homes) equals causation (suicide, pregnancy, poor SAT scores, juvenile delinquency). The term "fatherless home" is also misleading. These children have fathers, but the stats don't show the relationship the father has with the children. Is the father divorced, never married, dead? The numbers say nothing. The finger-pointing tone of the lists of children from
"fatherless homes" is very appealing to people who want to blame single mothers for the so-called downfall of America.
Signatories of F_M have appeared on this listserv in the past. Many of those signatories are leaders of fathers' rights organizations. Once their endorsement of F_M beliefs was discovered, many of those men and women scrambled to explain away their signatures and email/homepage links on the F_M signatory homepage. F_M has a more heinous and malevolent approach than NFI/"Fatherhood Initiative." Even though one group takes a disparaging stance and the other appears more conciliatory, both are concerned with the male maintaining his control over the female.
In a message dated 4/16/97 1:22:26 AM, @vianet.on.ca (Mark Balen) wrote:
Concerning the Father's Manifesto, Art writes
Although I admit to some skepticism, I will accept your very clear indication that you don't know about the Manifesto.
| ||What are those views?........How can I find out more about it?|
I don't think so though I haven't read the book. I doubt that Blankenhorn is the kind of extremely dangerous cook that would subscribe to the Manifesto. Haven't read the Manifesto for a while but I seem to remember stuff similar to a desire to return to the days when children were considered chattels, and an awful lot of other stuff which IMO are such nonsense that they are likely explained by malevolence and ...... well never mind that. Lets look at the above portion of Blankenhorn's book. Doesn't it simply say that children do better in intact happily married families. Just by the way, why do you insert (above) the words "read: single mother". I read "one parent". I read that there is a relationship observed between one parent families ( regardless of race or income) and crime levels. What does that contribute to our discussion. A relationship is not cause. You have been asked to consider that many times. Your first post suggested a number of absurd causal relationships. Your subsequent posts have been quite unresponsive to imprecations that you stop making the same simple pedestrian mistake. OVER and over. Frankly I can't believe, not anymore, that you are likely to stop and think that maybe everyone else may be trying to do you a favour. But please, please, please, prove me wrong.
Are they similar to the views expressed in David Blankenhorn's book, Fatherless America, Page 31, who wrote:=20
=93According to a 1990 study commissioned by the Progressive Policy Institute, the =91relationship between crime and one-parent [read:single mother] families=92 is =91so strong that controlling for family configuration erases the relationship between race and crime and between low income and crime. This conclusion shws up time and again in the literature.=94
And do re consider this whole children as chattels business. I am getting convinced you actually believe it.
Powered by FindMail