Men's News Daily: The State Of The Fatherhood Movement

Well, he spends a little too much time in promotion (self or otherwise), though I guess it's nice to see someone in the movement vaunting something, but eventually gets to his point. And his point is that men should be getting married and that MRAs should be advocating for marriage (ie, get to it, guys!). I am fine with that except in that marriage is broken. I mean, really broken. It is broken legally, socially, and economically. He is saying he wants to see it reformed. I think that is good, but my question is this: Reformed to what? Back to Ozzie and Harriet? That isn't going to work. Back to the days when it was for only "a year and a day"? Well, I have a feeling that won't fly with most of its advocates.

Really I don't see what the present has to offer adults of both sexes in terms of lifestyle/relationship choices that is better than being single. And I am not sure what a future that sees marriage as being a better state looks like.

I couldn't make head or tail of the article, or what the "Marriage Reform Movement" stands for, but I can tell you that marriage is a joke.

Marriage. Is. A. JOKE.
A sham.

Sorry to everyone planning to marry or who got married in the last few years, but in case you didn't notice, you can only have a quiet, peaceful, long-lasting marriage if she agrees to it. She can unilaterally choose to turn and take your life's savings, and you're forced to smile so you're not held in contempt of court.

Don't get Married folks.

http://petepatriarch.blogspot.com - Old, phased out due to Google's policies. Archives here.
http://petepatriarch.wordpress.com - Current.

"What benefits for MEN do you propose will be achieved in a "pro-marriage" MRA movement?"

I have almost been banned on MND for trying repeatedly to get this myopic shill to reply to this question!

And, he never has.

For a reason.

(Hint - Usher is a radical Republican who wants men to take on the burden via marriage of dismantling the minimal social welfare system we have for poor families -- (read) minority single mothers -- and he wants to turn all men into married indentured servants.)

This guy has NOTHING whatsoever to offer men insofar as real freedom and liberation from feminist legal tyranny.

He just wants all men to be "married."

Even worse, he wants to do away with "no-fault divorce," so that once a man is married, he has absolutely no escape.

i.e. - Usher wants men to be slaves.

I like to go back to the basic questions regarding the issue of marriage. Like, why is the state involved in marriage in the first place? Is it a legal contract with defined obligations for both parties? I don’t think so. If one party violates the contract (whatever that means in the case of marriage) is the other relieved of his/her obligations? Yeah, right. Practically speaking, there are few, if any, legally enforceable requirements on the parties while operating under this “contract” but the state comes out with guns blazing when one party decides they no longer like the “contract” they agreed to.

In the world designed by yours truly the current type of state involvement in marriage would be trashed. I see no legitimate reason for the state to be involved as it currently is. People could marry in a church, synagogue, YMCA, yoga class, or whatever and make personal commitments as they see fit without the state’s involvement. They could also, if the couple so chooses, draw up a legal contract defining the length of the agreement, the requirements of each person and the consequences for violations, giving the state a legitimate roll.

IMO the state intensifies problems in marriages by providing incentives to end them. All in the interest of greasing that deafening squeaky wheel.

He makes some interesting observations in his article. But, he says for example,

"We must remember that we cannot end father-absence by objecting to our absence, rather, we must point to feminist demolition of marriage, how it hurts everyone.."

He seems to place a lot of emphasis on what we need to do to get Republicans to take the father's movement seriously. But then he spews out a doozie (the quote above), which without doubt will alienate those on the left. I would like to tell him, "hey stupid, guess who's in power..especially if the Dem's win in 2008? You might want to focus on a bi-partisan approach, moron."

Ultimately this guys bible-thumping "pro-marriage", "feminists own the Democratic party" (and thus suggesting that Democrats are "anti-marriage") attitude hurts the fathers movement.

In brief, this guy's a politically motivated jackass. The impression I get is that the thing he hates about feminists the most, is that they are on the left. Am I wrong?

As long as those on the right, cannot see past the fact that the left provided an incubator for early feminism (okay, we know that..let's move on..), they will forever operate under the mythical notion that misandry is divided along party lines.
(I don't hear McElroy giving us the same partisan ideology, when it comes to men's or father's rights. On the other hand, Carey Roberts does occasional do this. hmmm..there is a trend..).

-ax

"There are many glass ceilings!" --Laura Bush

P.S: Dear Laura,
Feminism has guarenteed, that there will continue to be "glass ceilings" virtually for all eternity. Next NY Times headline: "Another Glass Ceiling Broken: First 25-Year Old Asain Single Mother With Psoriasis, Wins The Indy 500 During Rain On a Tuesday!"

but marriage needs to be re-formed BEFORE every body signs up to support it.
That is the problem. It is totally advantaging the women.
And if it is a traditional marriage, man works, wife stays with kids....then you are REALLY screwed in divorce. That is where the alimony, child support, loss of 401k, car, house comes in.

the traditional formula works very very well....until there is a breakdown of the agreement. then the man gets raped by "family court".

shared parenting needs to be fully in place before 'the new marriage' can take affect. otherwise it does not make good business sense for a man to marry....for a woman, it makes perfect sense...

oregon dad