In Time for Father's Day, "Time" Hatchets Dads

I didn't even have to look to know that the article was written by a woman.
In this case two.

Badger

Oh, look!

Yet another reason for me NOT to subscribe to TIME.

TIME does this all the time. It's nothing new and they will keep doing it as long as men take it.

E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/

Site and Blog: http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm

I am not a father, but I can definitely empathize with some guy harangued by 7 kids, and doing a good and loving job of raising them (with or without the mother), to sit down one evening in his chair after a hard day's work, pick up the nearest magazine and read this type of rubbish. Time's journalists should be ashamed of themselves.
-ax

Just by having TIME magazine, who Bugs Bunny owns anyway, trashing dads nonstop...they've given me another good excuse to not want to be a father!

Fuck this...FOR A HOUSEBOY, and fuck you TIME!

Eman
Emma.noelle.blay@hotmail.com

*****masculism is a black male's best friend!!!!!*****

I'm a father of three kids, who took up full-time care of them two years ago when their mother decided she wanted to dedicate more time to her boyfriends and dope and drinking addictions. I lost my own business as I wasn't able to run it fully and look after them, but got a job working two hours away from home, the nearest job I could find that pays me what I need to earn. I gave up the idea of moving closer to work as it meant moving the kids away from their school and from their mother.

Since then every day I've commuted nearly five hours a day, held down a professional full-time job, cooked and cleaned and washed and ironed and kept the house and the kids going. I take them to sports every weekend, and have been actively working on their mother to be more involved in their lives (she started at zero, and now takes them for two to three days each month).

Child support decided that as she doesn't earn a huge amount she only had to pay me $10 per week per child, which she has consistently defaulted on, not that I've held that against her. I bought them presents for her birthdays and Christmases and mother's day, and had to care for them during sick days and every single freaking holiday they had, with zero help from their mum.

Did I get any help? No. Did I get any recognition? No. When I contacted a local single parents group looking for a little assistance, was I warmly welcomed by the single mums (no single dads there)? No.

Now, after two years, it looks as if I'm going to lose my kids - they miss their mum, who has cleaned up her act a bit and has found accommodation near us. They want to live with her, and because of that I'm getting a huge, crippling child support payment that means I have to sell my home, and will not get to see them anywhere near as often as I'd like. But I'm doing it, because it's what my kids want. I'm giving up my home and my life and breaking my own heart, because it's what they want, my children whom I love. I'm paying the crippling $2,600 a month csa payments, and haven't missed one although it will probably shortly mean losing my car and a lot more besides.

But according to Time, I'm just a deadbeat dad who doesn't care, right?

They have been spewing the same bullshit for years. I don't think anyone with a brain takes them seriously which shows why the majority of their subscribers are Ameriskanks.

E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/

Site and Blog: http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm

Do we have any contact info for time or the author of this trash? We need to let them know how we feel about this.

Men's Rights NOW!!

EDIT -

Here you go...

letters@time.com

please write to this generic email. I hope someone checks the inbox every once in a while.

I've just sent them my letter.

Along with dismantling their bad science and including some of Glenn's facts; I added the following points. I'd post the whole thing, but it got long...

- time spent with kids after divorce, just wrong (see Glen's info)

- time spent with kids, misleading; uses Average, but doesn't account for child age, or state working mother's time with kids. Average quoted is well below that of other studies.

- default of child support vs car support is misleading, see Glenn's info.

- The authors stated that this article was specifically timed for fathers day

- There's no such thing as needing to "deserve" love or affection

- No one would ever claim that a full time working mom didn't deserve love/affection because they were spending less time with their children

- longer time spent by fathers on careers than mothers, is usually a sacrifice

- Their conclusion encourages women to divorce and seek new relationships with new men for the sake of the children. (two fathers better than one for children; fatherhood is an untapped resource)

closing:

This article reeks of having a political agenda.
The admitted intentional timing of this
article is reprehensible.
The attack on fathers on a day when they can
actually feel appreciated for their hard work,
is disgusting and sleezy.
Time magazine should be ashamed.

The next time I see a Time magazine ,
I will not pick it up, or purchase it.
And I will tell as many people as
I can to do the same.

Bunch of shitheads.

I don't know how they can keep publishing this kind of crap. Keep believing the same thing, never look any deeper, never consider the other side of things or even question what they've heard... Forgetting that there are real people, and reasons that things happen and that it's not because of their 3rd grade ideas (boys bad, girls good).

"The next time I see a Time magazine ,
I will not pick it up, or purchase it.
And I will tell as many people as
I can to do the same."

I agree with your viewpoint totally, and will personally follow the same course of action; but it must be realized, not to be discouraging, but that a magazine with the readership of Time knows they can get away with this and not be affected financially; just like the N.Y. Times has been doing for decades with their man-hating articles. Depressing, isn't it?

-ax

You know, the more I think of it, the majority of journalists do not even have a conscience; they are not human beings in the same sense as decent people. Maybe they are socio-paths at some level. Ditto for the people who run the companies they work for.

-ax

I know it's a drop in the bucket...
But some action is better than none.

With enough attention something good can come. Glenn's got a good point about how PBS worked out last year (read through the comments on his site).

Glenn's post here

within hours yesterday, hundreds of letters were sent to Times magazine.

No mention of how many letters to date.

I canceled my subscription yesterday. Time can kiss my ass.