[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Major progress for shared custodial rights in MA!
posted by Adam on 09:45 AM August 26th, 2004
Fatherhood CJ writes "I have to admit I was shocked to see the Boston Globe cover a pro-father issue, but progress can not be denied as the Mass fatherhood Coalition got a nonbinding question that will appear on ballots in 37 legislative districts this November asks voters if they support joint custody of children after divorce, unless one parent is deemed unfit or both agree otherwise. ''It's like putting up guardrails on the road of marriage,'' said Mike O'Neil, co-chairman of the Fatherhood Coalition, a statewide group that has about 3,000 members. ''We just want protection of our rights.'' Lets applaud Mike Franco for his efforts in Mass where men's rights have been brutalized for decades. Fatherhood Coalition article here"

DSS Used to Abuse Children | Maleness or Extinction? (Israel)  >

  
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Wow, needs more normal looking men (Score:1)
by galb on 06:51 AM August 27th, 2004 EST (#1)
(User #1848 Info)
I would encourage men activists involved in demonstrations to spend more time on their appearance, AND shave. I have no problem with big harry men, I have been a big harry man myself from time to time. However, there are a lot of negative stereotypes involved with beards now days. For example, the last time I wore a beard, everyone kept calling me Osama. I mean everyone.
Not the time to rest on our laurels (Score:1)
by Hunchback on 07:49 AM August 27th, 2004 EST (#2)
(User #1505 Info)
This is great news, but we mustn't get overconfident. In the two-plus months leading up to the referendum fathers' rights groups have got to get the message out and make themselves visible. A number of things could go wrong with this just effort if we relax:

1) the question may be worded in such a manner to turn voters away from shared parenting. It is helpful to remember that most of the public is ignorant of gender matters and could be swayed either way.

2) expect massive opposition from feminists and the legal establishment. We know were the former's stand on any attempt at justice for men, and the latter group stands to lose money. We should anticipate a largely unanswered media blitz from these two moneyed opponents.

3) a hostile or indifferent press. For forty years the press, in the absence of significant organized opposition, has been spoon-fed the feminist line on all gender issues. The press has been conditioned to go to the nearest fem org. for the quickest, surest sound-bite. Expect a slew of one-sided articles and TV segments questioning how shared parenting can exist without encouraging domestic violence. This is a favorite fem red herring.

4) the common sense of single voters and the self-righteousness of divorced women. Our strongest constituency is married and divorced men. Divorced women are the antis. But married women can not exactly be counted on either. One poll showed that only 30% of mothers wanted the father to be an equal partner in child rearing; the other 70% wanted the father to be either a "junior partner" or have only a minor role(40%). Single voters are the most likely to be indifferent about the matter. It is crucial to appeal to their sense of fair play and emphasize "the need of the children for both parents."

Even in the unlikely scenario of the legal establishment and feminists sitting this one out, a concerted effort must be made to educate the public at a grassroots level. I say leaflet them like there's going to be an aerial bombardment.
Re:Not the time to rest on our laurels (Score:2)
by Rand T. on 02:13 AM August 28th, 2004 EST (#3)
(User #333 Info)
One poll showed that only 30% of mothers wanted the father to be an equal partner in child rearing; the other 70% wanted the father to be either a "junior partner" or have only a minor role(40%).

Can you give me more information about this survey? Thanks.
Re:Not the time to rest on our laurels (Score:1)
by Hunchback on 09:28 PM August 28th, 2004 EST (#4)
(User #1505 Info)
I read this online, where I don't remember. It was a little over a month ago. It may have been Time Magazine or The NY Times Magazine or some other source. I believe the article may have concerned women dropping out of the work force or some such. Sorry.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]