|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MSN.com is misandrist. And it is yet even with this article.
MSN is not staffed by people living on Mars or Venus. They are living on Earth. America, to be precise. And, they know what is going on: men are fathering children and their wives are leaving them with the kids and sticking it to the dads. MSN.com supports this model of child-rearing and "family life". So of course it will occasionally publish something rosy-sounding towards dad-hood, all the while posting misandrist stuff the other 364 days of the year. Don't let this article fool you. They are still serving the women-firsters and feminazis, have no doubt. Here's how it works: have kids, wife leaves, you pay. If this article really was serious about handling "new dad angst", they would have had a Sixth Myth of Fatherhood: That you will actually be the father of your children (30% of all men are not in fact the fathers of their supposed children), your wife will love and support you in this and stay with you all your life (again, a 30% chance of her leaving you these days), and you will never be falsely accused of abusing your wife or kids by a vicious lying wife with a nasty shark for a lawyer.
There, I think I have clarified in context the value of this MSN.com article. Don't believe this as anything other than an attempt to get men to consider reproducing with a woman, only to be broad-sided by her as she heads for the door.
I am single and child-free, and damned glad of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MSN.com is a business like any other in most respects. They will provide the product they believe most appeals to their potential audience. Writing off MSN as hopelessly misandrist and not providing feedback simply helps to reinforce their position.
Everyone should write to MSN to let them know that there are people who don’t support their biased content. MSN (and any other company for that matter) will continue to present biased content as long as they believe it appeals to the public. In many ways compliments on the exceptions, such as this article, are more effective at promoting change than is negative feedback on the misandrist content itself.
And either is more effective than doing nothing.
I sent mine already, telling them (tactfully I think) that I appreciated this article and found it a refreshing change from the anti-male assaults that I usually see at MSN.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday January 05, @02:09PM EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
A good article on the real nature of the “responsible fatherhood” movement is here.
Basically, “responsible fatherhood” is very much like boy vs. girl education. When the system talks about girl education, it is about building skills, building confidence, empowerment, etc. When the system talks about boy education, it is about how to treat girls correctly, how to report dad when he yells at mom, etc. So, “responsible fatherhood” is about teaching males to be happy with their support payments and nothing to do with shared parenting or judicial reform.
Bush will gladly send thousands of men to war to secure reserves for his oil buddies. Don’t expect Bush to fight for men’s rights. The only men’s right Bush will fight for, is for the right of Uncle Sam to confiscate paychecks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday January 05, @03:01PM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
The Rowles article ("responsible fatherhood") at the link in the above post is excellent. Unfortunately, however, the site crashes with Netscape Navigator 4.6. Works with MS Explorer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday January 05, @03:12PM EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
At least the article gives some recognition that men are not just money-making machines. But consider this double-talk:
Fatherhood is socially constructed, meaning it adapts to the needs of individual cultures.
Ok, so the "social construction of fatherhood" in the West today, under prevailing "child support" law, is "if the DNA test matches, you're a father, and potentially obligated to pay about 30% of your income for 18 years". That's the law. The whole beauty of this "social construction" is that it has so successfully obscured what it really is.
Choice? What does that mean? You're men!
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
