Fathers disappear from households across America

[tailfins]

Fathers disappear from households across America

People “look at a child in need, in poverty or failing in school, and ask, ‘What can we do to help?’ But what we do is ask, ‘Why does that child need help in the first place?’ And the answer is often it’s because [the child lacks] a responsible and involved father,” he said.



Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/25/fathers-disappear-from-households-across-america/#ixzz2GBihgkvj

[fj1200]

Fathers disappear from households across America

Interesting, but I think they misidentify the problem, lack of fatherhood is a symptom of a larger problem. Bad welfare policies, bad education system, etc. that encourages/enables the behavior.

[Trigg]

three daughters have matching glittery boots, but none has the same father


Black families differ from other racial groups in that the average black single mother has more children, not fewer, than her counterpart with a father present. Hispanic single mothers were most often dealing with the most mouths to feed but still had fewer children than their married counterparts.
To have and to hold
Mr. DiCaro (http://www.debatepolicy.com/topics/vincent-dicaro/) points to a desire among the poor to produce something.
“When you have very little going for you in your life, having children can give purpose to it. If you’re married, you’re going to be much more cautious. There’s health care costs and our jobs, whereas if we were both just kind of doing whatever, then why not just have another kid



Personally I think it's an ingrained persecution complex and victim mentality that the black community needs to deal with.

[mundame]

Interesting, but I think they misidentify the problem, lack of fatherhood is a symptom of a larger problem. Bad welfare policies, bad education system, etc. that encourages/enables the behavior.

No, it's the fault of men who leave.

What good are men like that to anyone? No good.

[fj1200]

No, it's the fault of men who leave.

What good are men like that to anyone? No good.

And it's the fault of women who let themselves get played. But it's still symptom of a larger problem and policies that enable the situation need to be sorely looked at.

[tailfins]

No, it's the fault of men who leave.

What good are men like that to anyone? No good.

What about the men that are forced to leave over unsubstantiated abuse accusations? Most divorces are filed by women.

[mundame]

What about the men that are forced to leave over unsubstantiated abuse accusations? Most divorces are filed by women.


Most divorces filed by women are for excellent, excellent reasons. We cannot plausibly stay with worthless men who are in debt, drugging, drinking, abusive, won't work, and philandering. These men are more trouble than they are worth.

Marriage has certainly fallen apart in this country. Well, except for homosexuals, apparently.

[aboutime]

What about the men that are forced to leave over unsubstantiated abuse accusations? Most divorces are filed by women.


tailfins. mundame is obviously the very same kind of person she wants everyone else to believe is so defenseless, and innocent.

Liars tend to do that kind of thing. Always pointing fingers at others to hide their own ignorance, and hatred.

[tailfins]

tailfins. mundame is obviously the very same kind of person she wants everyone else to believe is so defenseless, and innocent.

Liars tend to do that kind of thing. Always pointing fingers at others to hide their own ignorance, and hatred.

I'm reading a book by Dr. Phil McGraw about the personality type you refer to. He calls them BAITERs:

Backstabbers
Abusive
Imposters
Takers
Exploiters
Reckless

[aboutime]

I'm reading a book by Dr. Phil McGraw about the personality type you refer to. He calls them BAITERs:

Backstabbers
Abusive
Imposters
Takers
Exploiters
Reckless


Sounds about right. Wonder why he left out the most important, and most common word of all. Namely 'Selfish'?
People who constantly need to be the center of attention, without regard for the feelings of others are SELFISH.

Sounds pretty familiar these days too!

[mundame]

Abusive
Imposters
Takers
Exploiters
Reckless

You are describing men who abandon their wives and children, right?

Yeah, that works.

[tailfins]

You are describing men who abandon their wives and children, right?

Yeah, that works.

BAITERs don't have a demographic profile, only behavioral. Smart guys dispatch difficult gals by the third date. And no, there's no "just friends".

[aboutime]

You are describing men who abandon their wives and children, right?

Yeah, that works.


More like describing people like you as well mundame. It takes two to tango, and females are not ALWAYS the innocent victims in those cases. Need proof? Tell us your story!

[tailfins]

More like describing people like you as well mundame. It takes two to tango, and females are not ALWAYS the innocent victims in those cases. Need proof? Tell us your story!

Most people are useful for something. I suspect she would make a good bill collector.

[mundame]

Did I get in the way of a good rant about how women are the reason you all abandoned your families and children?


Naaaaaaaaah, men who bug out on their families are just no damn good, that's how that works.

[tailfins]

Did I get in the way of a good rant about how women are the reason you all abandoned your families and children?


Naaaaaaaaah, men who bug out on their families are just no damn good, that's how that works.

That's more crap you just pulled out of your butt. I just said I walked away before it got anywhere near that.

[taft2012]

Interesting, but I think they misidentify the problem, lack of fatherhood is a symptom of a larger problem. Bad welfare policies

And under "bad welfare policies" we can break down further. Say the father *DOES* have a job, by disappearing the family unit without him can collect:

Section 8 Housing
Medicaid
Food Stamps
WIC
AFDC

A lot of this non-present fathers only disappear on paper though, for welfare purposes. Sometimes they have cash-paying jobs and therefore have no reportable "income."

[CSM]

I doubt that there is any single reason for the state of affairs we see today. It has occured to me that society has been very busy creating the conditions that make a father's disappearance the norm. Unintended consequences (most of them) resulting from obfuscation of now antiquated gender roles, confusion (intentionally created, in my opinion) over the definition of marriage, acceptance of denial of individual responsibility (if not outright encouragement of same), and the blatant support for lack of self discipline. There are many other circumstances that contribute to the problem. Anyone of them alone is not responsible but collectively ....

[fj1200]

I doubt that there is any single reason for the state of affairs we see today. It has occured to me that society has been very busy creating the conditions that make a father's disappearance the norm. Unintended consequences (most of them) resulting from obfuscation of now antiquated gender roles, confusion (intentionally created, in my opinion) over the definition of marriage, acceptance of denial of individual responsibility (if not outright encouragement of same), and the blatant support for lack of self discipline. There are many other circumstances that contribute to the problem. Anyone of them alone is not responsible but collectively ....

The genesis of these cultural changes predate any debate over the definition of marriage.

[CSM]

The genesis of these cultural changes predate any debate over the definition of marriage.

True dat! However, it is a factor CURRENTLY which will only excaerbate the problem. None of this happened overnight, obviously. By the way, I was not necessarily referring specifically to the homsexual aspect. I was more thinking of the idea that marriage is a "temporary" arrangement due to the prevalence of divorce.

[taft2012]

Another factor that is often overlooked is the quota system, which has accounted for the disproportionate ascendancy of the black woman in the workplace.

As the government bean counters pored through workforce rosters for blacks and women, employers quickly realized the black woman was two beans in one.

This has contributed to the marginalization of the black man, in both roles as breadwinner and head of the household.

More unintended consequences of liberal good intentions.

[fj1200]

True dat! However, it is a factor CURRENTLY which will only excaerbate the problem. None of this happened overnight, obviously. By the way, I was not necessarily referring specifically to the homsexual aspect. I was more thinking of the idea that marriage is a "temporary" arrangement due to the prevalence of divorce.

OK, gotcha.

[mundame]

I doubt that there is any single reason for the state of affairs we see today. It has occured to me that society has been very busy creating the conditions that make a father's disappearance the norm. Unintended consequences (most of them) resulting from obfuscation of now antiquated gender roles, confusion (intentionally created, in my opinion) over the definition of marriage, acceptance of denial of individual responsibility (if not outright encouragement of same), and the blatant support for lack of self discipline. There are many other circumstances that contribute to the problem. Anyone of them alone is not responsible but collectively ....


Yeah....thoughtful post, IMO.

I realize this is radical, but lately I've been noticing that all the cultural/demographic changes are in the direction of lowering population. The world is wildly overpopulated, we've all seen crowding more and more all our lives, and it's nothing here like the megaslums everywhere in poor countries. We had a hockey-stick graph of incredible population increase starting about 1800, demographers call it an "outbreak" and one writer said we're the only large mammal that has had an outbreak --- usually it's caterpillars or frogs or something!

And it can't last, outbreaks never do, and usually crash disastrously with most of the population dying.

I think we may be having a huge, inchoate, instinctive turn against overpopulation and it has resulting in this downfall of normal marriage, easy divorce, acceptance of illegitimacy, homosexual marriage (which gets a lot of people out of reproduction), the Chinese system of limiting family size, the Indian system of aborting so many female fetuses, abortion spreading around the world and becoming accepted, the Pill and other birth control devices developed and widely use, Catholic doctrine simply ignored by essentially the entire lay population, and whatever else is going on against reproduction that I've not noticed or forgotten.

It's all against reproduction, because it's either we reduce population ourselves, or war and disease and famine will appear on their horses, as they always do. Malthus rides again.

[CSM]

I think that reproduction or lack thereof is a side effect. I don't necessarily attribute it to a worldwide cabal to force a reduction in the global population. I think it is more a result of the industrialization of the major nations on the planet. Children (and traditional marriage) no longer have the value they once did. In agrarian socities, children, and especially male children are almost a necessity to ensure the survival of the family. With industrialization and automation, not as many laborers are required. I believe that is one of the reasons you see lower birth rates in modern countries. In fact, specifically in the US, I think there are many that believe children are a burden or at least a hinderance to the hedonistic lifestyle that industrialization allows for most. More free time dedicated to personal endeavors and recreation. There are exceptions, of course, but I speculate that some in this country (perhaps the majority) of those ethnicities still having many children do so because the government pays them to do so. Just my personal thoughts on the matter as I have not done any in depth research on the matter.

[fj1200]

And it can't last, outbreaks never do, and usually crash disastrously with most of the population dying.

Global population is already growing more slowly and is expected to eventually decrease. Countries with advanced economies limit their own populations naturally.

Current projections show a continued increase in population in the near future (but a steady decline in the population growth rate), with the global population expected to reach between 7.5 and 10.5 billion by 2050.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#cite_note-WorldOMeterSite-2)[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#cite_note-9)[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#cite_note-UN-10) Various longer-term estimates predict further growth, stagnation, or even overall decline in the global population by 2150.[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#cite_note-LongRangeProjections2003KeyFindings-11) Some analysts have questioned the sustainability of further world population growth, citing the growing pressures on the environment and global food supplies.[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#cite_note-12)[13] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#cite_note-TIMEenvir-13)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/56/World-Population-1800-2100.svg/587px-World-Population-1800-2100.svg.png


Malthus rides again.

Malthus was wrong, if he wasn't we'd already be dead.

[mundame]

Global population is already growing more slowly and is expected to eventually decrease. Countries with advanced economies limit their own populations naturally.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/56/World-Population-1800-2100.svg/587px-World-Population-1800-2100.svg.png



Malthus was wrong, if he wasn't we'd already be dead.



Plainly you have not read Malthus; everyone who reads him is blown away. The logic is simple and obvious. It is that all life reproduces infinitely --- until it reaches a natural limit. Whatever, whenever that is. Maybe you think humans have no natural limits: that we can keep increasing until each of us stands on one square foot of ground, but then......Malthus would stop us, right? or maybe you are one of the "Tomorrow the Stars!" people that think we'll transcend the planet. I think all this is nonsense and our over-population will crash just like lemmings surge over the cliff into the sea, or expansions of caterpillars die by the billions in a mess of goo all over the trees. It's the norm.

Darwin read Malthus and it caused him to think of the idea of evolution and write Origin of Species; that's how profound Malthus is.

As to empty speculation about what is "going to" happen, why not wait and see what actually does happen? When the planet held two billion humans, no one correctly predicted we'd so soon reach 7 billion and gross overcrowding! Colored graphs are not actually predictive: they are just pretty.

"Climate change" is another symptom of overcrowding and desire to bring down the population, I think. It's all nonsense, of course, but it's a way to talk about overpopulation without dealing with the non-PC fact that most over-populating is being done by blacks, browns, and yellows: whites are depopulating radically everywhere they live. White intellectuals can't say that, so they make up this "climate change" myth. It's not working, if that is what they are trying to talk about without saying browns are having too many babies --- soon they'll have to address the issue directly, but probably not till some great plague or famine attracts the West's attention to the problem.

[mundame]

I don't necessarily attribute it to a worldwide cabal to force a reduction in the global population.


I don't either! I was hoping I made that clear by saying I am speculating that some sort of inchoate, instinctive population reduction is going on, like rats are said to respond to overcrowding by not having so many babies.

I don't in general believe in cabals and worldwide plots --- there are certainly institutions and local cabals that do that, and that's their business, to plot to succeed long-term: Amazon, Apple, the Catholic Church, the Mormons, the Republican party professionals, etc., etc.

But these are local cabals. There ain't no Illuminati, though it was a colorful myth (from the French Revolution) and I mean to read the book by the man who thought them up. Nobody controls the world; if they did, it wouldn't be such a disaster zone.

[fj1200]

Plainly you have not read Malthus; everyone who reads him is blown away. The logic is simple and obvious. It is that all life reproduces infinitely --- until it reaches a natural limit. Whatever, whenever that is. Maybe you think humans have no natural limits: that we can keep increasing until each of us stands on one square foot of ground, but then......Malthus would stop us, right? or maybe you are one of the "Tomorrow the Stars!" people that think we'll transcend the planet. I think all this is nonsense and our over-population will crash just like lemmings surge over the cliff into the sea, or expansions of caterpillars die by the billions in a mess of goo all over the trees. It's the norm.

Blown away because so far he has been proved correct? I think not. "Everyone" :rolleyes: The logic may be simple but his vast underestimation of mankind greatly outweighs it.

And clearly you didn't get the gist of my post.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

And under "bad welfare policies" we can break down further. Say the father *DOES* have a job, by disappearing the family unit without him can collect:

Section 8 Housing
Medicaid
Food Stamps
WIC
AFDC

A lot of this non-present fathers only disappear on paper though, for welfare purposes. Sometimes they have cash-paying jobs and therefore have no reportable "income."

ALL OF THAT IS TRUE , IS SYSTEMATIC AND IS THE MAJOR REASON FOR BLACK HOUSEHOLDS WITHOUT A LIVE IN FATHER. THE BLACK WOMEN ARE REWARDED FOR BEING "SINGLE" BY CASH AND OTHER FREEBIES. THE BLACK MEN ARE REWARDED BY LIVING IN HOMES WHETHER THEIR OWN THAT THEY "ON PAPER DO NOT RESIDE" OR IN OTHERS WITH WOMEN THAT ARE ON THE FREEBY SYSTEM TOO. THIS ALLOWS FOR THEM TO LIVE FREE FROM FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES AND KEEP THE CASH THEY GET BY WORK OR HOOK AND CROOK! ALSO LETS THE MEN SLEEP AROUND SEEDING THE MONEY MAKERS FOR THE WOMEN.
ALL TRUE, SO NOTHING RACIST ABOUT MY POSTING IT. I'VE BEEN SEEING IT FOR OVER 40 YEARS. WORKED WITH many BLACK MEN THAT AGREED THAT I AM RIGHT ABOUT IT TOO!!
Several that even remarked , yes you white people show pay well for your guilt.... One guy named Leon had 9 different women that he one ,two or even 3 kids by and went by each home first of the month to collect his share of the welfare check, used to joke about it ! Drove a new cadillac and gambled away 300 or 400 dollars a week at the racetrack , back in the early 70's and never had less than 2,000 dollars in hundred dollar bills in his wallet. He was the worst but by no means was he alone in raping the system.
All thanks to liberal do-good, buy votes, give away policies!!---Tyr

[mundame]

Blown away because so far he has been proved correct? I think not. "Everyone" :rolleyes: The logic may be simple but his vast underestimation of mankind greatly outweighs it.

And clearly you didn't get the gist of my post.


Perhaps not. Explain it differently, if you like.

But I fear you are saying that Malthus is all bosh because humans can keep reproducing till the entire Earth is filled solid with humanity, squeezing on top of each other several layers deep --- and then go on infinitely reproducing in layers up through the atmosphere into empty space reproducing and reproducing!


But I'm with Malthus: I think some natural limits would kick in before that.


A lot of people say a lot of silly things about how the more people on Earth the better, but they are just wrong.

[fj1200]

Perhaps not. Explain it differently, if you like.

Or I don't need to explain it differently, you just need to read it differently, i.e. correctly.

[Thunderknuckles]

Back to the OP, has anyone mentioned that the downturn happened after 1950? This may make some of the ladies mad but I think a big factor of this is radical feminism which teaches young women that they don't need a man, they can do anything and man can do, if not better. This also coincides with the decline in marriage. The traditional family is on the decline and children are the primary victims. Our society as a whole is the secondary victim.

[mundame]

they don't need a man, they can do anything and man can do, if not better. This also coincides with the decline in marriage.

Well, to be fair, that is probably true. There's a new book out, "The End of Men, the Rise of Women." Women DO make much better employees, and that's why our unemployment rate was so much less during this recession. Men drop out permanently from the economy at higher rates after unemployment periods. Men drink and drug and do violent abuse more; everyone knows that.

There are more women than men; we have more of the money of the nation; we are getting 55% of the college degrees, we are employed at a higher rate, we vote more (which is why I went completely nuts at the crazy anti-women stance of the Republican Party this past year -- why alienate the majority of the voters???).

We've come a long way, baby, and why go back to taking care of abusive, critical men? Ain't gonna do that......men are going to have to shape up if they want wives and homes and children, I'd say. You don't get women to do that for you for nothing, for acting bad, anymore.

America is depopulating, but much less than Germany or Japan or Russia so far!! The stats are incredible in those countries: women simply will not marry. Most women insist they will NOT have children. Something big is happening, some population movement that is not easy to understand.

But I think we're depopulating in the smart countries because we're overcrowded. The stupid countries keep on overcrowding until they have no economies, no room, no way to live except in cardboard shacks all shoved together with no toilets.

[DragonStryk72]

You are describing men who abandon their wives and children, right?

Yeah, that works.

Hey, as guy who has been in an abusive relationship with a woman, I'd appreciate it if you'd stop acting like it didnt and doesnt happen.

As men, we are taught for two decades that there's no good reason to hit a girl, so what happens when its the girl hitting us? Well, we freeze. Then, afterward, there's this sense of shame that goes along with not being able to protect yourself, and so you don't talk about it.

From there, you become "trained". When I finally left, I went to live with friends who took me in, and the damage was pretty. I had to ask about each item of food I wanted each time I got something, and even down to each glass of water. I literally didn't eat during the day, because I had no one to ask if it was okay to have a sandwich. Even with a tin of cookies, I had to ask for each one. This is made more strange by the fact that they were my cookies, a tin that my best friend gave me as a welcome gift.

I couldn't even just go out to get something at Taco Bell, because "that is a total waste of money when there's perfectly good food in the house!"

So no, I do not believe that Women are the sole victims here. First off, women have the power in relationships. Seriously, if it were men, you would be asking us out and trying to impress us instead of the other way around.

Second, I believe the loss of the standard family unit does have an impact on things. We formed those groups for hundreds of thousands of years for a reason. I don't even think it necessarily having a father, but having both a male and female role model present is important to our development.

[tailfins]

Well, to be fair, that is probably true.

It seems women are unable to raise well adjusted children by themselves. I guess Nancy Lanza is a role model to you.

[mundame]

It seems women are unable to raise well adjusted children by themselves. I guess Nancy Lanza is a role model to you.


Nancy Lanza is a WHOLE lot better role model than that worthless nothing she was married to who abandoned his family and troubled son so he could divorce her and marry a floozy!!

The father is the villain in this piece, not the mother: the mother is always, always the default parent. That's the parent who sticks with the disabled child, the retarded child, the mentally disturbed child. SHE didn't desert Adam Lanza, his father did!

If his father had stuck with the family and changed the conditions even a little, 28 people including 20 small children would not have died. It is apparent to me that this Lanza father is the whole reason it happened ---- because he voluntarily deserted his family.


Men like that aren't worth gully dust.

[tailfins]

Nancy Lanza is a WHOLE lot better role model than that worthless nothing she was married to who abandoned his family and troubled son so he could divorce her and marry a floozy!!

The father is the villain in this piece, not the mother: the mother is always, always the default parent. That's the parent who sticks with the disabled child, the retarded child, the mentally disturbed child. SHE didn't desert Adam Lanza, his father did!

If his father had stuck with the family and changed the conditions even a little, 28 people including 20 small children would not have died. It is apparent to me that this Lanza father is the whole reason it happened ---- because he voluntarily deserted his family.


Men like that aren't worth gully dust.


You're saying men are somehow unneeded, but you're also saying they should stick around. So which is it? And.... it's just plain silly to expect an alpha male to be someone they are not.

[Abbey Marie]

Interesting, but I think they misidentify the problem, lack of fatherhood is a symptom of a larger problem. Bad welfare policies, bad education system, etc. that encourages/enables the behavior.

I'd agree it is a symptom of a larger problem, but not the ones listed.

[mundame]

You're saying men are somehow unneeded, but you're also saying they should stick around. So which is it? And.... it's just plain silly to expect an alpha male to be someone they are not.


Men are unneeded if they are no damn good, that's clear.

It's no wonder to me that women won't marry or have babies anymore, with men like that Lanza character around pretending they are husband material, which obviously he was not. He was a worthless loser whose son ended up a mass murderer because of his father's abandonment.

If men can't manage marriage and fatherhood, it's better for women to give it all a miss. We certainly don't need the population, so good. It's all working out for the best.

[mundame]

I'd agree it is a symptom of a larger problem, but not the ones listed.


I would be interested in what you think are the larger problems?

[tailfins]

Men are unneeded if they are no damn good, that's clear.

It's no wonder to me that women won't marry or have babies anymore, with men like that Lanza character around pretending they are husband material, which obviously he was not. He was a worthless loser whose son ended up a mass murderer because of his father's abandonment.

If men can't manage marriage and fatherhood, it's better for women to give it all a miss. We certainly don't need the population, so good. It's all working out for the best.


"No good" is very subjective. You seem to have the opinion of a modern day Ward Cleaver as "no good". Many men still insist on being the "king of the castle". Those men will outsource if an American woman refuses to give that man the place he insists on having.

[mundame]

"No good" is very subjective. You seem to have the opinion of a modern day Ward Cleaver as "no good". Many men still insist on being the "king of the castle". Those men will outsource if an American woman refuses to give that man the place he insists on having.


Okay, I don't actually disagree with that. A ram is not a ewe; I keep sheep and I know that. You gotta work with the raminess. Trying to work against it is pretty futile; they are heavier than normal humans (women, for instance) and have a center of gravity that wins every contest.

King of the Castle is one thing, assuming he ACTS like a king.

Tyrant, dictator, Genghis Khan, Hitler, Henry VIII, mugger, assaulter, drunk, druggie, good-for-nothing disease-ridden philanderer ------------------- none of that is the same as king. King, okay. The rest, unacceptable.

If men aren't able anymore to do marriage, it's our big chance to depopulate the world.

Consider the arithmetic: Replacement rate is every woman having two children who survive. If every woman now around has only ONE child, in one generation, we'll have HALF the population! Then if those women have only ONE child each, the next generation will have only a quarter of the current population. And do it once more: one more generation like that and we're down to one-eighth! Which would be pretty much ideal. Deep forests, lots of game, no more extinctions, no more worry about global warming caused by us, no more over-fished fisheries, no mass pollution, plenty of sport opportunity, better scenery, far less crime ----

Really, it would be great if we did stop populating and went the other way. So keep on maltreating and abandoning your families, guys. We'll figure it out and stop marrying and having children. This could really work.

[Thunderknuckles]

Well, to be fair, that is probably true. There's a new book out, "The End of Men, the Rise of Women." Women DO make much better employees, and that's why our unemployment rate was so much less during this recession. Men drop out permanently from the economy at higher rates after unemployment periods. Men drink and drug and do violent abuse more; everyone knows that.

There are more women than men; we have more of the money of the nation; we are getting 55% of the college degrees, we are employed at a higher rate, we vote more (which is why I went completely nuts at the crazy anti-women stance of the Republican Party this past year -- why alienate the majority of the voters???).

We've come a long way, baby, and why go back to taking care of abusive, critical men? Ain't gonna do that......men are going to have to shape up if they want wives and homes and children, I'd say. You don't get women to do that for you for nothing, for acting bad, anymore.

America is depopulating, but much less than Germany or Japan or Russia so far!! The stats are incredible in those countries: women simply will not marry. Most women insist they will NOT have children. Something big is happening, some population movement that is not easy to understand.

But I think we're depopulating in the smart countries because we're overcrowded. The stupid countries keep on overcrowding until they have no economies, no room, no way to live except in cardboard shacks all shoved together with no toilets.

You seem to be biased against men Mundame. I disagree with the notion that men have somehow devolved between 1950 and now or the notion that men have been bad all along.
Radical feminism has brought about a cultural shift. Women have become more independent, which is good, but it seems they are taking an attitude similar to yours that many of us are just bad eggs and should be avoided. This cultural shift has also affected young men and caused confusion in exactly what role they are to take in a family where radical feminism says they are no longer needed. This is a very bad thing. Children optimally need both a father and a mother in the home. Current culture says no you don't. A single mother will do just fine. It won't and the demographics agree. Additionally, only a father can provide the type of guidance a young man needs. Young males have always been more prone to violence but it is getting worse due to the simple fact that at some point a mother can no longer keep her son in "check" where a father can. As a result, young males with no father in the home are free to push the boundaries of what they can get away with and society at large suffers from the effect.

[gabosaurus]

Did I get in the way of a good rant about how women are the reason you all abandoned your families and children?

Naaaaaaaaah, men who bug out on their families are just no damn good, that's how that works.

How many DP men divorced their first spouse and left their children?
It's not just an ethnic problem. Quite often, it is a problem with ego. Or perhaps raging hormones.

[mundame]

You seem to be biased against men Mundame. I disagree with the notion that men have somehow devolved between 1950 and now or the notion that men have been bad all along.
Radical feminism has brought about a cultural shift. Women have become more independent, which is good, but it seems they are taking an attitude similar to yours that many of us are just bad eggs and should be avoided. This cultural shift has also affected young men and caused confusion in exactly what role they are to take in a family where radical feminism says they are no longer needed. This is a very bad thing. Children optimally need both a father and a mother in the home. Current culture says no you don't. A single mother will do just fine. It won't and the demographics agree. Additionally, only a father can provide the type of guidance a young man needs. Young males have always been more prone to violence but it is getting worse due to the simple fact that at some point a mother can no longer keep her son in "check" where a father can. As a result, young males with no father in the home are free to push the boundaries of what they can get away with and society at large suffers from the effect.

Of course you are entirely right, Thunderknuckles, and thanx for your really excellent post, as I see it.

I only think men who actually ARE bad eggs should be avoided. The good ones are wonderful.

However, men who abandon their families, run off with other women, leave their children, drink, drug, do crimes, and above all are abusive --- well, what can one really say in favor of an egg like that? It's rotten; there it is. Best for women to take the time to figure out which they are and stay well away from them.

If men are able to handle being king of the castle and father of the family, great. If they can't, well, welcome to America 2012.

[mundame]

How many DP men divorced their first spouse and left their children?
It's not just an ethnic problem. Quite often, it is a problem with ego. Or perhaps raging hormones.

Ouch. Everytime I think I'm getting edgier than you, Gabosaurus, you win again. :laugh:

But more power to you.

[Thunderknuckles]

How many DP men divorced their first spouse and left their children?
It's not just an ethnic problem. Quite often, it is a problem with ego. Or perhaps raging hormones.
That is a bit shallow. The problem is far more deeper than that. This isn't just a male issue. Again, culturally we have changed. Marriage no longer has the value it once had.
Traditional family values have been relegated to old fashioned ideas that only cave dwellers believe in. This affects both men, women, and worst of all, children.

[aboutime]

What I see in all of the Anti-men posts in this thread is the absence of honest, shared responsibility by Women as well.

Sounds like mundame, and gabby easily blame men. Avoiding the real facts that MAYBE....they are the culprits as well. So they must always blame the men to hide their own hypocrisy, and lousy outlook on life that they have created themselves.

Marriage is a 100 X 100 percent union. Not 50 X 50. As I said earlier.

It takes TWO to tango. So, blaming all of the troubles on Men alone merely tells the rest of us where the REAL PROBLEM may be in the denial by the women who hate men.

Their problem then becomes...after they choose a female partner. That eventually....even that union doesn't work out perfectly. But they always avoid blaming the other woman to prevent showing their true Hypocrisy.

And to those who ask me how I can dare offer such opinions. In March. My wife and I will have been together, and married for 44 years. How many of you angry Females can say that?

And if you still refuse to accept what I said. Thank you for proving me correct.

[jimnyc]

Well, to be fair, that is probably true. There's a new book out, "The End of Men, the Rise of Women." Women DO make much better employees, and that's why our unemployment rate was so much less during this recession. Men drop out permanently from the economy at higher rates after unemployment periods. Men drink and drug and do violent abuse more; everyone knows that.

There are more women than men; we have more of the money of the nation; we are getting 55% of the college degrees, we are employed at a higher rate, we vote more (which is why I went completely nuts at the crazy anti-women stance of the Republican Party this past year -- why alienate the majority of the voters???).

We've come a long way, baby, and why go back to taking care of abusive, critical men? Ain't gonna do that......men are going to have to shape up if they want wives and homes and children, I'd say. You don't get women to do that for you for nothing, for acting bad, anymore.

America is depopulating, but much less than Germany or Japan or Russia so far!! The stats are incredible in those countries: women simply will not marry. Most women insist they will NOT have children. Something big is happening, some population movement that is not easy to understand.

But I think we're depopulating in the smart countries because we're overcrowded. The stupid countries keep on overcrowding until they have no economies, no room, no way to live except in cardboard shacks all shoved together with no toilets.

I had not realized prior to this that you were a man hater. You're starting to sound a tad like Wind Song. Why not acknowledged the TONS of women who walk away from homes leaving only a father to raise the children? I'm sure statistics will show it's a man disappearing the majority of the time, but that's still no reason to completely absolve women in the problem and acknowledge how many of them are the same as you describe, not just the men.

[tailfins]

That is a bit shallow. The problem is far more deeper than that. This isn't just a male issue. Again, culturally we have changed. Marriage no longer has the value it once had.
Traditional family values have been relegated to old fashioned ideas that only cave dwellers believe in. This affects both men, women, and worst of all, children.

A bit? Boys need to taught at a young age to not participate in feminism. It's an abusive ideology. Even in liberal dominated areas, there are pockets that don't buy into feminism. As far as I'm concerned, Manhattan is the ghetto and the Bronx is a more livable place for those very reasons. I would take a Guatemalan neighborhood in the Bronx over Martha's Vinyard or Cape Cod any day of the week. The approach is easy: Just don't socialize with feminists.

[fj1200]

I'd agree it is a symptom of a larger problem, but not the ones listed.

Listed by me?

[mundame]

I'm sure statistics will show it's a man disappearing the majority of the time,

Majority? Nearly every time it happens. Women are the default parents, the ones society can rely on. Can society rely on men to be parents?



Nope. Men leave.

[mundame]

AThe approach is easy: Just don't socialize with feminists.



I'm going to bet that isn't a problem for you........

They all run screaming.

[jimnyc]

Majority? Nearly every time it happens. Women are the default parents, the ones society can rely on. Can society rely on men to be parents?



Nope. Men leave.

Again, not in all cases, therefore that would then be "majority", correct? I've seen MANY, MANY, MANY families falling back to the father to be the only parent in the home as the mother has left for quite a few different reasons.

And now you are going to blanket "men" when you say society can't rely on them? Why should parents like myself, in long first marriages, with child, be lumped into your description?

[jimnyc]

I'm going to bet that isn't a problem for you........

They all run screaming.

Why are you using "all" so often and vilifying "all" men with continued statements? You blame it "all" on men and make no mention of women.

[aboutime]

Why are you using "all" so often and vilifying "all" men with continued statements? You blame it "all" on men and make no mention of women.


jimnyc. Looks like there is little doubt how mundame actually hates ALL men. And like anyone who displays a hatred for anyone so vividly. It is usually a sign of SELF-HATRED they refuse to accept.

Labeling ALL as mundame seems to do so much. Is just another sign of a sickness where it is always easier to just blame others, than to accept any responsibility. As in..."IT'S ALWAYS THE MAN'S FAULT, and the WOMAN CAN NEVER DO ANY WRONG". That's what they believe. And we see it.

[jimnyc]

jimnyc. Looks like there is little doubt how mundame actually hates ALL men. And like anyone who displays a hatred for anyone so vividly. It is usually a sign of SELF-HATRED they refuse to accept.

Labeling ALL as mundame seems to do so much. Is just another sign of a sickness where it is always easier to just blame others, than to accept any responsibility. As in..."IT'S ALWAYS THE MAN'S FAULT, and the WOMAN CAN NEVER DO ANY WRONG". That's what they believe. And we see it.

Based purely on statistics, she might be correct on most fronts, but we're not even discussing why or what happened, simply the outcomes, which generally aren't pretty. But I've seen marriages in my time where a mother left because of drugs and cheating, one just left voluntarily, one mother simply got divorced and lost in court, and many where the Mom just kind of bailed. It happens, and it's just as bad as when a kid loses a father. I'm of the belief they need both a mother figure and a father figure. But while the majority of these households are without fathers for whatever reason. And a decent chunk of them are without mothers. I just don't see the need at all to place blame on "all", male or female, but rather address why EITHER is failing and try to make things better, instead of simply laying blame and pointing fingers.

[mundame]

And now you are going to blanket "men" when you say society can't rely on them? Why should parents like myself, in long first marriages, with child, be lumped into your description?

I don't know your circumstances and it's not my business. Of course if you have been one of the good guys who actually performed your wedding vows, and your marriage only ended with your wife's death, congratulations to you and please accept my condolences.

I am only complaining about the men who bug out early. If you didn't do that, good.

[jimnyc]

I don't know your circumstances and it's not my business. Of course if you have been one of the good guys who actually performed your wedding vows, and your marriage only ended with your wife's death, congratulations to you and please accept my condolences.

I am only complaining about the men who bug out early. If you didn't do that, good.

So I can't be considered to be a good guy, unless I've already been with a vowed with until death. My record of simply being there to this point doesn't count? And neither for the other millions of Dads who are still at home?

Why no complaints about the women who bug out early? Doesn't that bother you? Or just not worth mentioning? Or they get a free pass?

[tailfins]

I'm going to bet that isn't a problem for you........

They all run screaming.

I call that an efficient strategy.

[aboutime]

I don't know your circumstances and it's not my business. Of course if you have been one of the good guys who actually performed your wedding vows, and your marriage only ended with your wife's death, congratulations to you and please accept my condolences.

I am only complaining about the men who bug out early. If you didn't do that, good.


mundame. No matter how much you apologize, or try to appease us. YOU used the word "ALL". Would you like to define your use of that word now?

[mundame]

So I can't be considered to be a good guy, unless I've already been with a vowed with until death. My record of simply being there to this point doesn't count? And neither for the other millions of Dads who are still at home?

Why no complaints about the women who bug out early? Doesn't that bother you? Or just not worth mentioning? Or they get a free pass?


Oh, dear. Are you saying you are STILL MARRIED?? to the same woman? Well, if so, please excuse me. I misunderstood your status. Of course that's fine, that's great. None of us can do any better than "now," can we? We can't go into the future. No, I agree with you: any man (or woman, though that is less of an issue because fewer women desert their families) who is still doing the right thing and raising a family and taking care of a marriage, takes the prize.


Some women bug out early, but so many more men do that, or do unexcusable things that break up a marriage like drinking and drugging and philandering and abuse, that this is my position: I don't expect people to be perfect. I only expect men to do no worse than women. If men insist they are so great, hey, let them AT LEAST do no worse than women, no larger percentage of them desert or do grossly antisocial behaviors and criminal behaviors that break up marriages. At least do no worse. I don't think that is asking too much! Percentages the same. No more men deserting their children than women do. Fair?

[mundame]

I call that an efficient strategy.


Quite a good answer........ :laugh:


Okay, you won that exchange.

[jimnyc]

Oh, dear. Are you saying you are STILL MARRIED?? to the same woman? Well, if so, please excuse me. I misunderstood your status. Of course that's fine, that's great. None of us can do any better than "now," can we? We can't go into the future. No, I agree with you: any man (or woman, though that is less of an issue because fewer women desert their families) who is still doing the right thing and raising a family and taking care of a marriage, takes the prize.


Some women bug out early, but so many more men do that, or do unexcusable things that break up a marriage like drinking and drugging and philandering and abuse, that this is my position: I don't expect people to be perfect. I only expect men to do no worse than women. If men insist they are so great, hey, let them AT LEAST do no worse than women, no larger percentage of them desert or do grossly antisocial behaviors and criminal behaviors that break up marriages. At least do no worse. I don't think that is asking too much! Percentages the same. No more men deserting their children than women do. Fair?

You'll notice I didn't defend anyone from not being a parent, but that's where the key is - parent. Sometimes Dad's aren't in the house any longer but are still being good Dad's. Far too many times this is counted in the list of Dad's bailing, when it's more a circumstance of a court case. By no means does this imply all, or anywhere near that, but this is the issue when we paint with broad brushes. There are endless reasons for why a Dad may not be in the home anymore, probably most bad, but lots out of his control and not his choice. So I don't take issue with it being said that more men than women, by a wide margin, are the ones to bail from a family and their parental responsibilities. But you still can't blanket "all" men, not even close.

[tailfins]

You'll notice I didn't defend anyone from not being a parent, but that's where the key is - parent. Sometimes Dad's aren't in the house any longer but are still being good Dad's. Far too many times this is counted in the list of Dad's bailing, when it's more a circumstance of a court case. By no means does this imply all, or anywhere near that, but this is the issue when we paint with broad brushes. There are endless reasons for why a Dad may not be in the home anymore, probably most bad, but lots out of his control and not his choice. So I don't take issue with it being said that more men than women, by a wide margin, are the ones to bail from a family and their parental responsibilities. But you still can't blanket "all" men, not even close.


I read that false abuse allegations are a typical strategy to gain the upper hand in a divorce. This often leads to a restraining order.

http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/

[Trigg]

Well I'm not quite sure how this thread turned so quickly to man bashing.

Seems to me the point of the OP was to say that traditional families have fallen by the wayside, especially in the black community where marriage is not exactly something ANYONE strives for.

Birth control is given out for free. FREE.....

Men wouldn't be able to abandon their responsibilities if women didn't let them. Sorry, but these women weren't raped, they slept with irresponsible men and didn't take any precautions to prevent pregnancy. They also didn't bother to get married before getting pregnant. REPEATEDLY

One oops pregnancy, I get that, but not 3

The woman in the article has not 1 but 3 daughters from 3 different men. This isn't the fault of the men, it is the woman's low self worth.

[Abbey Marie]

I would be interested in what you think are the larger problems?

Sorry, I should have explained, but I had to get going.

I'm sure I've said these things many times before, but here goes:

I blame the culture as a whole (rampant sexuality in all forms of media), for making many people, but especially men, feel vaguely or even acutely dissatisfied with their spouses and marriages. Before TV and the net, we didn't really know how many (supposed) hotties were out there for the taking, lol.

I blame the marginalizing and ridiculing of Biblical values for a decline in integrity. Once you lose integrity, all bets are off. A lot of this can be traced back to the media, but there is also the rise in secularism and treating God as persona non grata in schools, workplaces, the town square, etc., to blame.

Since blacks are disproportionately responsible for having single parent families, they deserve a special look. I don't put all the blame on black men for abandoning their women. That relationship looks so incredibly dysfunctional from the outside. I do blame black women for having promiscuous unprotected sex; especially before they can afford to have a child. But it takes two to tango, so the blame must be shared there. I do also fault the women for being so angry at their men so much of the time. Who would want to stay around so much anger and yelling? I'm not saying they are the only people like that, but if we are honest, a casual trip to the store tends to show those cultural differences.

As for Mundame hating men, I don't think that's true. I think she, no more or less than anyone else here, is a product of her (less than idyllic?) experiences. From what I've read here lately, some of you guys seem to "hate" American, or at least, strong, women, more than Mundame may "hate" men. I'm sure your experiences have led you to feel this way, so I don't generally comment. So let's stop trying to make her look bad, since you are not really qualified to cast any stones through that window.

[Abbey Marie]

Well I'm not quite sure how this thread turned so quickly to man bashing.

Seems to me the point of the OP was to say that traditional families have fallen by the wayside, especially in the black community where marriage is not exactly something ANYONE strives for.

Birth control is given out for free. FREE.....

Men wouldn't be able to abandon their responsibilities if women didn't let them. Sorry, but these women weren't raped, they slept with irresponsible men and didn't take any precautions to prevent pregnancy. They also didn't bother to get married before getting pregnant. REPEATEDLY

One oops pregnancy, I get that, but not 3

The woman in the article has not 1 but 3 daughters from 3 different men. This isn't the fault of the men, it is the woman's low self worth.

:clap:

[Abbey Marie]

I also meant to say, I don't see why people have these marriage gender/power issues. My husband and I help each other out, in whatever ways we can.

I have worked; I don't now, and trust me it is not because he can't handle me working. I think he would find that idea laughable. We raised our daughter while I worked. She is a very smart, capable, loving Christian girl, about to graduate from college with a dean's list average. I contend that she had two good role models- including a mom who worked as a professional, but put family first. I even managed to drive her to and from school throughout all those school years- no school buses. Having a hands-on Dad for a husband definitely helped to make it all possible.

There are certain things my husband does, and certain things I do. Because we are either good at them, or don't mind them too much. Not because it's a woman's job or a man's job. And these are not set in stone. When you have a spirit of love and helping, these issues don't really exist.

[mundame]

Birth control is given out for free. FREE.....

Well, why shouldn't it be given away, if some funder wants to? Oh, wait, maybe you mean people can get it free so they SHOULD. They should stop illegitimate pregnancies. I agree with that.


Men wouldn't be able to abandon their responsibilities if women didn't let them.

Sure they would. What can any woman do once the man decides to boogie on down the road? Thousands of men walk out of a house with two crying toddlers and never come back. There's nothing any woman can do about that except kick herself for getting involved with a worthless loser.




The woman in the article has not 1 but 3 daughters from 3 different men. This isn't the fault of the men, it is the woman's low self worth.

Disagree. It's simply black women's reproduction strategy. They know they can't get any man to stay; none of them can, pretty much. But they want children anyway. So they --- get the job done! They have to raise the family all by themselves, but hey, they can get birth control and they can get abortions: they are CHOOSING to raise children by themselves. They cannot choose to have a husband, because the men won't do that.

That's how white women who want babies are going to have to do more and more, too, if white men won't get involved in a family and stay in a family. Men are too much trouble to keep as pets; better just use them as sperm donors if they can't actually manage to be decent husbands and stay the course for life. Otherwise they can do their own washing and cleanup on their own, in a trailer with Jack Daniels and the Weather Channel for company.

[jimnyc]

I find some of the continued broad brushing solely of men to be of poor taste and reeking of someone who has an issue with men and an agenda of sorts. Again, there are TONS of women who walk out. There are even MORE TONS of men who are at home currently, doing what a responsible father and husband would do. But all of us men seem to be fair game by mundame in this thread. I say save it for those who are guilty of their offenses and not lay blame on "all" men. I was raised by my father from 11 until I moved out. Was he somehow still about "all" men? What did he do wrong?

[WiccanLiberal]

Good grief is it any wonder relationships fail when so many people seem to have such negative opinions of the opposite sex? Men are not all alike any more than women are. I have seen, certainly, men who have abandoned their responsibilities. Sadly women do the same with depressing regularity. I have seen women escape abusive relationships and I have seen men stuck in them because of societal expectations that men just suck it up. Relationships shouldn't be about control, they should be about cooperation and empowerment. And I call shenanigans on the idea that a single parent can't effectively raise children. Just do a quick search and you will discover many successful individuals raised by a single parent including several presidents going back to George Washington. The necessary factor is personal responsibilty for the relationship and for the child. The current crop of shrinks need to be chased off the talk show circuit and we need to get back to the idea of holding people responsible for their actions from an early age. My parents raised me to be capable of managing without a man in my life if I needed to but capable of appreciating the value of a lifelong partnership. V4R and I argue and we disagree. But we are partners and life faced together is much easier to get through. So all of you here who have jumped on the easy bandwagon of blaming the man for the failure of the American family had better look a little closer because the problem is a good deal more complex.

[mundame]

Good grief is it any wonder relationships fail when so many people seem to have such negative opinions of the opposite sex? Men are not all alike any more than women are. I have seen, certainly, men who have abandoned their responsibilities. Sadly women do the same with depressing regularity. I have seen women escape abusive relationships and I have seen men stuck in them because of societal expectations that men just suck it up. Relationships shouldn't be about control, they should be about cooperation and empowerment. And I call shenanigans on the idea that a single parent can't effectively raise children. Just do a quick search and you will discover many successful individuals raised by a single parent including several presidents going back to George Washington. The necessary factor is personal responsibilty for the relationship and for the child.

Okay, so two people, Jimmy and Wiccan, both think the current system with divorces aplenty and single parents is just fine. So there's no problem. Right?

So why are we complaining? I'm happy the world is starting to lower population because women won't marry or have children in many countries, and some of you are happy to dispense with the opposite sex and marriage and raise your children all by your lonesome.

Great. I guess it's a perfect world.

[jimnyc]

Okay, so two people, Jimmy and Wiccan, both think the current system with divorces aplenty and single parents is just fine. So there's no problem. Right?

So why are we complaining? I'm happy the world is starting to lower population because women won't marry or have children in many countries, and some of you are happy to dispense with the opposite sex and marriage and raise your children all by your lonesome.

Great. I guess it's a perfect world.

Where have either of us stated the bold? Do you know how juvenile it appears when someone just makes stuff up about others like we are in 3rd grade? I said nothing about anything being fine, I simply stated that both sides are a part of this problem and not all men should be vilified. You take that and make it into the rant above, which has nothing, zip, zilch to do with what I said.

While not a perfect husband by any means, nor perfect parent, I take offense to being lumped into a negative category simply because of my sex. I take offense to men in general, and as a whole, being spoken of as problematic as you have done. And you've done it several times, even after being corrected.

The problem people are those that walk out on their parenting, whether that be a male or female. And none of those people speak for or represent their entire sexes. Let blame fall where it belongs and don't point fingers at the masses or those not even involved. And most assuredly, don't just make something up in an attempt to make the other person look bad.

[aboutime]

Okay, so two people, Jimmy and Wiccan, both think the current system with divorces aplenty and single parents is just fine. So there's no problem. Right?

So why are we complaining? I'm happy the world is starting to lower population because women won't marry or have children in many countries, and some of you are happy to dispense with the opposite sex and marriage and raise your children all by your lonesome.

Great. I guess it's a perfect world.

Now that you are pretending to fall on your sword for EVERY WOMAN on earth. Could you please just admit stupidity runs in your genes?

[jimnyc]

This is eerily reminiscent of a discussion I had with Wind Song about domestic violence. She went on and on and on about men. I agree with almost everything she stated. Admitted it was obviously more men guilty of this violence. It was just annoying to hear her make blanket statements about "all" men and refused to acknowledge that women were guilty as well, albeit in much smaller numbers. Some go to lengths to ensure they can speak of the other sex as a whole instead of condemning the actual "crime". Makes me wonder.

And also similar, that when their outright lies are exposed, they read the thread, and move on without addressing it.

[mundame]

And also similar, that when their outright lies are exposed, they read the thread, and move on without addressing it.

I'm not interested in responding to verbal abuse. I like talking to polite and cheerful people. Not mean namecallers. If people want a conversation, great. If they want to abuse me, who needs it.

I have for a long time been interested in this old saying, "I don't take no shit off nobody!!" But for a quarter century I thought it meant fighting back! Responding to insults and aggression with insults and aggression. This worked out poorly because a lot of people who do that are simply crazy or demented (not you) and the rest, it just eggs them on. They love the attention so they do it more.

So I was baffled. Then I read in a quote book Johnny Depp saying his mother had always taught him, "Don't take no shit off nobody!" And finally, I got it!

It means don't take crap from people as the condition of having a conversation or a relationship with them. A lot of people want to insult first and put substantive, interesting points second so you have to accept the insults to have a discussion.

I'm not going to do that, however. You can insult me or you can have a conversation, but you can't do both at once.



Tailfins said something very like that once, started me thinking: "If you actually want your question answered, don't include a put-down." Wonderful! Thank you, Tailfins, well said.

[DragonStryk72]

How many DP men divorced their first spouse and left their children?
It's not just an ethnic problem. Quite often, it is a problem with ego. Or perhaps raging hormones.

Or perhaps the feminists on here should try believing in actual equality, as opposed to the blame game.

The problem is human beings. Both people contribute to the problems that end a marriage, just as they contribute to keeping themselves single. Plenty of men are willing to give single mothers a shot. I should know, I am one of those guys.

[jimnyc]

Where have either of us stated the bold? Do you know how juvenile it appears when someone just makes stuff up about others like we are in 3rd grade? I said nothing about anything being fine, I simply stated that both sides are a part of this problem and not all men should be vilified. You take that and make it into the rant above, which has nothing, zip, zilch to do with what I said.

While not a perfect husband by any means, nor perfect parent, I take offense to being lumped into a negative category simply because of my sex. I take offense to men in general, and as a whole, being spoken of as problematic as you have done. And you've done it several times, even after being corrected.

The problem people are those that walk out on their parenting, whether that be a male or female. And none of those people speak for or represent their entire sexes. Let blame fall where it belongs and don't point fingers at the masses or those not even involved. And most assuredly, don't just make something up in an attempt to make the other person look bad.


This is eerily reminiscent of a discussion I had with Wind Song about domestic violence. She went on and on and on about men. I agree with almost everything she stated. Admitted it was obviously more men guilty of this violence. It was just annoying to hear her make blanket statements about "all" men and refused to acknowledge that women were guilty as well, albeit in much smaller numbers. Some go to lengths to ensure they can speak of the other sex as a whole instead of condemning the actual "crime". Makes me wonder.

And also similar, that when their outright lies are exposed, they read the thread, and move on without addressing it.


I'm not interested in responding to verbal abuse. I like talking to polite and cheerful people. Not mean namecallers. If people want a conversation, great. If they want to abuse me, who needs it.

I have for a long time been interested in this old saying, "I don't take no shit off nobody!!" But for a quarter century I thought it meant fighting back! Responding to insults and aggression with insults and aggression. This worked out poorly because a lot of people who do that are simply crazy or demented (not you) and the rest, it just eggs them on. They love the attention so they do it more.

So I was baffled. Then I read in a quote book Johnny Depp saying his mother had always taught him, "Don't take no shit off nobody!" And finally, I got it!

It means don't take crap from people as the condition of having a conversation or a relationship with them. A lot of people want to insult first and put substantive, interesting points second so you have to accept the insults to have a discussion.

I'm not going to do that, however. You can insult me or you can have a conversation, but you can't do both at once.



Tailfins said something very like that once, started me thinking: "If you actually want your question answered, don't include a put-down." Wonderful! Thank you, Tailfins, well said.

So wait a minute... YOU talk smack of ALL men, but men can't come in and defend themselves? Even if they haven't done what you accuse them of? And what "verbal abuse"? Calling the way you MADE THINGS UP as juvenile? Where is this abuse you speak of? THERE IS NONE!

Wow, and coincidentally Wind Song used to continually claim people were abusing her when there was no proof whatsoever to substantiate such a claim.

I have news for you - I don't take shit from people either. If you make ignorant comments, and apply them to EVERY man, be expected to be called out on your crap. Don't think you are somehow off limits. This is just your lame way of getting out of backing up the absolute bullshit you posted.

[jimnyc]

Read my response and bailed yet again. That's twice now you have made false claims about me and didn't have the honesty and integrity to either backup your claims or retract them. I don't think I've stated anything at all in here to which you stated myself and Wiccan did. I also was not verbally abusive, as you put it. I think you're just upset that I included women in the discussion, and stated reasons why "all" men shouldn't be labeled, and now you're trying to make me the villain - just like WS used to do.

It might be easier if you would just not blanket statements about an entire sex. Then you won't have to be on the run, dodging questions I ask that make you look like sexist, and foolish, in your writings.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Ok, men are getting a bad rap here. Both sexes are guilty of being certified assholes at times! My second wife shot anybody all to hell in that category. Even abused our daughter. Neither sex has a monopoly on doing evil because both are human . Granted men used to be far worse but recent decades women have advanced into the trash with men. In my opinion its close to a fifty fifty deal now. Not really worth debating because its a product of our culture now. Our moving way from moral principles into the do what feels good movement. Both sexes guilty and in marriage that means where kids are involved its they that suffer the most! A damn crying shame that is for sure!-Tyr

[aboutime]

I'm not interested in responding to verbal abuse. I like talking to polite and cheerful people. Not mean namecallers. If people want a conversation, great. If they want to abuse me, who needs it.

I have for a long time been interested in this old saying, "I don't take no shit off nobody!!" But for a quarter century I thought it meant fighting back! Responding to insults and aggression with insults and aggression. This worked out poorly because a lot of people who do that are simply crazy or demented (not you) and the rest, it just eggs them on. They love the attention so they do it more.

So I was baffled. Then I read in a quote book Johnny Depp saying his mother had always taught him, "Don't take no shit off nobody!" And finally, I got it!

It means don't take crap from people as the condition of having a conversation or a relationship with them. A lot of people want to insult first and put substantive, interesting points second so you have to accept the insults to have a discussion.

I'm not going to do that, however. You can insult me or you can have a conversation, but you can't do both at once.



Tailfins said something very like that once, started me thinking: "If you actually want your question answered, don't include a put-down." Wonderful! Thank you, Tailfins, well said.


mundame. And you have been proving to the rest of us that...THAT SHIT flows both ways. You opened your mouth, made a blanket statement...now you pretend you are the poor Victim...telling everybody you don't take that shit.
Close your pie-hole. Get a life, or someone who will kiss your butt and think the same way about you.

[jimnyc]

Since mundame has decided to ignore me...

Can someone, anyone, point out to me where I stated "both think the current system with divorces aplenty and single parents is just fine" or anything similar to this, which mundame attributed to me? And while at it, where I was "verbally abusive" in this thread? Is calling comments "juvenile" that were attributed to me wrongly abusive? Is it abusive to label what someone wrote as a lie, if it is in fact a lie? I'm willing to bend back and/or apologize when I go over the line, but I never made the statements attributed to me and I was never "abusive" in the manner I call abusive.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Good grief is it any wonder relationships fail when so many people seem to have such negative opinions of the opposite sex? Men are not all alike any more than women are. I have seen, certainly, men who have abandoned their responsibilities. Sadly women do the same with depressing regularity. I have seen women escape abusive relationships and I have seen men stuck in them because of societal expectations that men just suck it up. Relationships shouldn't be about control, they should be about cooperation and empowerment. And I call shenanigans on the idea that a single parent can't effectively raise children. Just do a quick search and you will discover many successful individuals raised by a single parent including several presidents going back to George Washington. The necessary factor is personal responsibilty for the relationship and for the child. The current crop of shrinks need to be chased off the talk show circuit and we need to get back to the idea of holding people responsible for their actions from an early age. My parents raised me to be capable of managing without a man in my life if I needed to but capable of appreciating the value of a lifelong partnership. V4R and I argue and we disagree. But we are partners and life faced together is much easier to get through. So all of you here who have jumped on the easy bandwagon of blaming the man for the failure of the American family had better look a little closer because the problem is a good deal more complex.

I did quite well raising my daughter by myself from age 14 to age 18. She told me my being there for her and never abandoning her meant everything to her! I have that note and will never part with it!! Kudos to those parents of either sex that put the child's welfare first and foremost. Those parents are not appreciated enough by the world at large. It takes great sacrifice to do what is right and struggle on alone for the kid's's sake. Men and women both do that. My divorce was so terrible at first because I thought I might not get my daughter!! For I knew my wife would do her best to destroy her should she get custody! As an adult my daughter has told me she cried herself to sleep back then worrying that her mom would get custody! Each person should be judged accordingly , not as a group , male or female. I've seen women that were real heroes for what they struggled to do alone! -Tyr

[Kathianne]

Well I'm not quite sure how this thread turned so quickly to man bashing.

Seems to me the point of the OP was to say that traditional families have fallen by the wayside, especially in the black community where marriage is not exactly something ANYONE strives for.

Birth control is given out for free. FREE.....

Men wouldn't be able to abandon their responsibilities if women didn't let them. Sorry, but these women weren't raped, they slept with irresponsible men and didn't take any precautions to prevent pregnancy. They also didn't bother to get married before getting pregnant. REPEATEDLY

One oops pregnancy, I get that, but not 3

The woman in the article has not 1 but 3 daughters from 3 different men. This isn't the fault of the men, it is the woman's low self worth.

When looking at the breakdown of the black family, it was predicted in the Moynihan Report during the time the Civil Rights legislation was passing. It wasn't the 'freedoms' but some of the programs, including welfare and incentives to have an absent father to increase 'income' from the government. Prior to this since the Civil War, in spite of significant discrimination, lower education opportunities, and poverty; black families, both legal and common law were MORE stable than after the legislation passed. No surprise. Incentives were for getting the father out of the home.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/229730/moynihan-report-and-ongoing-family-breakdown/rich-lowry

http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/10/04/specials/moynihan-report.html

[Kathianne]

Sorry, I should have explained, but I had to get going.

I'm sure I've said these things many times before, but here goes:

I blame the culture as a whole (rampant sexuality in all forms of media), for making many people, but especially men, feel vaguely or even acutely dissatisfied with their spouses and marriages. Before TV and the net, we didn't really know how many (supposed) hotties were out there for the taking, lol.

I blame the marginalizing and ridiculing of Biblical values for a decline in integrity. Once you lose integrity, all bets are off. A lot of this can be traced back to the media, but there is also the rise in secularism and treating God as persona non grata in schools, workplaces, the town square, etc., to blame.

Since blacks are disproportionately responsible for having single parent families, they deserve a special look. I don't put all the blame on black men for abandoning their women. That relationship looks so incredibly dysfunctional from the outside. I do blame black women for having promiscuous unprotected sex; especially before they can afford to have a child. But it takes two to tango, so the blame must be shared there. I do also fault the women for being so angry at their men so much of the time. Who would want to stay around so much anger and yelling? I'm not saying they are the only people like that, but if we are honest, a casual trip to the store tends to show those cultural differences.

As for Mundame hating men, I don't think that's true. I think she, no more or less than anyone else here, is a product of her (less than idyllic?) experiences. From what I've read here lately, some of you guys seem to "hate" American, or at least, strong, women, more than Mundame may "hate" men. I'm sure your experiences have led you to feel this way, so I don't generally comment. So let's stop trying to make her look bad, since you are not really qualified to cast any stones through that window.

Mundame IS a man. A man that seems to have an extremist feminist voice. I'm unsure if it's just to be a stirrer or he really believes all he posts?

[Kathianne]

Well, why shouldn't it be given away, if some funder wants to? Oh, wait, maybe you mean people can get it free so they SHOULD. They should stop illegitimate pregnancies. I agree with that.



Sure they would. What can any woman do once the man decides to boogie on down the road? Thousands of men walk out of a house with two crying toddlers and never come back. There's nothing any woman can do about that except kick herself for getting involved with a worthless loser.





Disagree. It's simply black women's reproduction strategy. They know they can't get any man to stay; none of them can, pretty much. But they want children anyway. So they --- get the job done! They have to raise the family all by themselves, but hey, they can get birth control and they can get abortions: they are CHOOSING to raise children by themselves. They cannot choose to have a husband, because the men won't do that.

That's how white women who want babies are going to have to do more and more, too, if white men won't get involved in a family and stay in a family. Men are too much trouble to keep as pets; better just use them as sperm donors if they can't actually manage to be decent husbands and stay the course for life. Otherwise they can do their own washing and cleanup on their own, in a trailer with Jack Daniels and the Weather Channel for company.

Wow, racist and sexist in one post.

[Trigg]

Wow, racist and sexist in one post.




Disagree. It's simply black women's reproduction strategy. They know they can't get any man to stay; none of them can, pretty much.

I was going to post the same response. Mundame obviously has a very LOW opinion of black people.

[Abbey Marie]

Interestingly, we have a pretty good parallel here between gender violence and violence in the name of religion.

Men commit the overwhelming amount of domestic violence, but some feel it is crucial to point out that women commit some too (although much, much less).

Muslims commit the overwhelming amount of religious violence, but some feel it is important to point out that Christians commit religious violence too (although much, much less, and almost all a very long time ago).

Editorial comment: I don't believe we need to point out the fact that "some' violence is perpetrated by other groups, every time a point is made about a much larger group violence problem. First, I consulted the board police, and they said it actually isn't required. ;) Second, it throws off any chance of a good, solid discussion on the huge problem actually being discussed, as we veer off on tangents and often, attacks.

[tailfins]

Ok, men are getting a bad rap here. Both sexes are guilty of being certified assholes at times! My second wife shot anybody all to hell in that category. Even abused our daughter. Neither sex has a monopoly on doing evil because both are human . Granted men used to be far worse but recent decades women have advanced into the trash with men. In my opinion its close to a fifty fifty deal now. Not really worth debating because its a product of our culture now. Our moving way from moral principles into the do what feels good movement. Both sexes guilty and in marriage that means where kids are involved its they that suffer the most! A damn crying shame that is for sure!-Tyr

Where does one go to get such certification? Is an examination required? Where do I find the study materials? What is the passing score?

[tailfins]

Interestingly, we have a pretty good parallel here between gender violence and violence in the name of religion.

Men commit the overwhelming amount of domestic violence, but some feel it is crucial to point out that women commit some too (although much, much less).

Muslims commit the overwhelming amount of religious violence, but some feel it is important to point out that Christians commit religious violence too (although much, much less, and almost all a very long time ago).

Editorial comment: I don't believe we need to point out the fact that "some' violence is perpetrated by other groups, every time a point is made about a much larger group violence problem. First, I consulted the board police, and they said it actually isn't required. ;) Second, it throws off any chance of a good, solid discussion on the huge problem actually being discussed, as we veer off on tangents and often, attacks.

That's called PREJUDICE, prejudging someone based on a "group guilt". Those who don't practice prejudice gain an edge by benefiting from the expertise of the victims of PREJUDICE whether they be male, Muslim or both. But who am I to argue with the OFFICIAL editorial point of view? I hope I don't get sanctioned for it.

[jimnyc]

Mundame IS a man. A man that seems to have an extremist feminist voice. I'm unsure if it's just to be a stirrer or he really believes all he posts?

Really? For sure? And in this very thread speaking as if a woman? That's odd, very odd.

[jimnyc]

Interestingly, we have a pretty good parallel here between gender violence and violence in the name of religion.

Men commit the overwhelming amount of domestic violence, but some feel it is crucial to point out that women commit some too (although much, much less).

Muslims commit the overwhelming amount of religious violence, but some feel it is important to point out that Christians commit religious violence too (although much, much less, and almost all a very long time ago).

Editorial comment: I don't believe we need to point out the fact that "some' violence is perpetrated by other groups, every time a point is made about a much larger group violence problem. First, I consulted the board police, and they said it actually isn't required. ;) Second, it throws off any chance of a good, solid discussion on the huge problem actually being discussed, as we veer off on tangents and often, attacks.

Oh, I do. It's highly unfair to make it seem as if ONLY men leave households. Or that ALL men act in this manner. THAT is where the thread goes off, when someone mislabels or paints with such a huge brush. If these people can't correct the misstatement, then they go unchallenged. I don't think it's fair that I get lumped into a bad/bogus group and be told I shouldn't correct a statement in interest of the thread.

As for the religious discussions; I would agree with you if speaking of a specific action, and someone tossed in another religious group from another time. But what we're talking about here would be the equivalent of someone stating that only one group is ever violent and that everyone in that group is violent.

[Abbey Marie]

That's called PREJUDICE, prejudging someone based on a "group guilt". Those who don't practice prejudice gain an edge by benefiting from the expertise of the victims of PREJUDICE whether they be male, Muslim or both. But who am I to argue with the OFFICIAL editorial point of view? I hope I don't get sanctioned for it.

I guess you will never get over my having the audacity to move two of your posts to the cage. And me being a girl and all.

Lol.

[Abbey Marie]

Oh, I do. It's highly unfair to make it seem as if ONLY men leave households. Or that ALL men act in this manner. THAT is where the thread goes off, when someone mislabels or paints with such a huge brush. If these people can't correct the misstatement, then they go unchallenged. I don't think it's fair that I get lumped into a bad/bogus group and be told I shouldn't correct a statement in interest of the thread.

As for the religious discussions; I would agree with you if speaking of a specific action, and someone tossed in another religious group from another time. But what we're talking about here would be the equivalent of someone stating that only one group is ever violent and that everyone in that group is violent.

I agree that you were mischaracterized here. Didn't mean to imply that you weren't. As often happens in threads, the wrong people get blamed for statements they never made. As with you, here.

As for the generalized statement, I think some here do that very thing. About Muslims, Christians, blacks, men, women, Republicans, Dems, you name it. Again, not you. You tend to post about specific incidents.

[tailfins]

I guess you will never get over my having the audacity to move two of your posts to the cage. And me being a girl and all.

Lol.

Uh, no. It's how you remind people of your status in your posts. I have you pegged as someone who enjoys pushing people around.

[Abbey Marie]

Uh, no. It's how you remind people of your status in your posts. I have you pegged as someone who enjoys pushing people around.

:laugh: Yup, that's me all right. Transferring two posts to the cage- what an animal! In all my years on two boards, I don't think I've run across anyone as sensitive as you.

[jimnyc]

I agree that you were mischaracterized here. Didn't mean to imply that you weren't. As often happens in threads, the wrong people get blamed for statements they never made. As with you, here.

As for the generalized statement, I think some here do that very thing. About Muslims, Christians, blacks, men, women, Republicans, Dems, you name it. Again, not you. You tend to post about specific incidents.

All "she" had to say was "the majority of parents that leave are men, although some women do" - or very simply have uttered similar when I tried to correct "her". She/He seemed to want to continued with the "all" and blanket statements. All I tried to do was correct that, and make it clear that not all of us men are like that. I take my vows seriously and just as serious my parenting responsibilities, and I just don't want that marginalized and told that more or less I can't until my spouse has died. Then I had ridiculous words placed in my mouth that I never said. Then when I tried to put yet more light on this crap, I was told I was being abusive. Granted, I have in fact been abusive to people over the years, verbally of course, but this wasn't one of those times.

It just seemed like blame was going in the direction of the people trying to get out of such characterizations and not towards the person making such blanket statements.

[jimnyc]

Btw, would someone who posts online, as both man and woman, be a transgender? :coffee:

[tailfins]

Btw, would someone who posts online, as both man and woman, be a transgender? :coffee:

Maybe they are just polishing their liar's skills.

[jimnyc]

Tail, not for nothing, and I'm being totally honest here. I know you don't love Abbey at this point, and likely nothing I say will change that. But when you describe things it comes off as she is a pushy staff member who throws her weight around. FWIW - I've had a lot of moderators and admins since I started USMB in 2003 and started this place in 2007. Out of all of staff, I think Abbey has been the most hands off. Wait, maybe Avatar4321 who I think most don't even know is a staff member... But Abbey, for someone who is an administrator no less, has probably moderated less things than can be counted on 2 hands.

Just my $.02 cents, which I really don't even have!

[tailfins]

Tail, not for nothing, and I'm being totally honest here. I know you don't love Abbey at this point, and likely nothing I say will change that. But when you describe things it comes off as she is a pushy staff member who throws her weight around. FWIW - I've had a lot of moderators and admins since I started USMB in 2003 and started this place in 2007. Out of all of staff, I think Abbey has been the most hands off. Wait, maybe Avatar4321 who I think most don't even know is a staff member... But Abbey, for someone who is an administrator no less, has probably moderated less things than can be counted on 2 hands.

Just my $.02 cents, which I really don't even have!

All I ask for is some acknowledgement. Some indication that she doesn't enjoy doing derogatory actions as an admin would help too.

[jimnyc]

All I ask for is some acknowledgement. Some indication that she doesn't enjoy doing derogatory actions as an admin would help too.

I think the fact that she rarely, if ever, moderates, is a good indicator. And had she wanted to toss her weight around, she could have moved more posts since or done something else. It's been nothing but 2 members posting back and forth since. The same thing that any other 2 members could do. I think what we have here is just 2 members not exactly seeing eye to eye, and one of them happens to be an administrator.

[aboutime]

Btw, would someone who posts online, as both man and woman, be a transgender? :coffee:


jimnyc: How would anyone know in the Internet world of Anonymity we all interact within?????

Does anyone really KNOW anyone else? Unless they have personally met at some time prior to coming here?

My answer would be "ALL OF THE ABOVE". Just to make conversation, and stop laughing.

[darin]

Folks need to get their egos in check. using the "You're an Admin" as some sort of an INSULT is retarded. Folks get NO acknowledgment "on demand". Back off guys. Focus on the topic:

Man-hating women blame MEN for getting tired of their shit.

:)

[gabosaurus]

Uh, no. It's how you remind people of your status in your posts. I have you pegged as someone who enjoys pushing people around.

So you think men should be the only ones who push people around?
Nope, sorry, we've been pushed around enough. Women didn't have any rights for much of history. In some societies, they still don't. Which is obviously since you seem to favor the women who accept being secondary.
Women don't have to be "feminazis" to want to be equal to men in a relationship. All marriages should be 50-50. There are some very happy marriages where the woman is the bread winner, through design or circumstance.



Man-hating women blame MEN for getting tired of their shit..

Obviously you don't say this at home. Unless you enjoy sleeping on the porch. :p

[aboutime]

So you think men should be the only ones who push people around?
Nope, sorry, we've been pushed around enough. Women didn't have any rights for much of history. In some societies, they still don't. Which is obviously since you seem to favor the women who accept being secondary.
Women don't have to be "feminazis" to want to be equal to men in a relationship. All marriages should be 50-50. There are some very happy marriages where the woman is the bread winner, through design or circumstance.




Obviously you don't say this at home. Unless you enjoy sleeping on the porch. :p


Oh, POOR GABBY. Now the Lone Ranger. Everybody who isn't female picks on her. Boo Hoo!
4212As Tom Hanks once said, in "A League of their Own". Paraphrasing...."There's No Whining in Gabbyland!"