5
6

Father's Rights and Women's Equality (nytimes.com)

Man-jusri が 投稿

全 35 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト (提案されたアイデア)
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]NUMBERS2357 16ポイント17ポイント  (0子コメント)

Is the father's rights movement a legitimate claim for equality, or a backlash against feminism?

This only makes sense if you assume that feminists could never support anything that would hurt men, which is of course untrue.

Feminists are some of the most influential voices on gender related issues. If you start with the assumption that anything that's feminist can't be wrong (if something can be wrong and supported by feminists, then that would mean something could be both a legitimate claim for equality, and a backlash against feminism), then you might as well give up forming your own opinion on anything.

[–]Man-jusri[S] 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

This is a 'Room for Debate' discussion about the father's rights movement that focuses primarily on the issues that affect unmarried fathers. Cultural assumptions about unmarried fathers, and legal impediments to their assertion of parental rights are discussed, as are concerns that the father's rights movement is a regressive force that seeks to roll back progress towards women's equality.

Edit: I found this quote from Kevin Noble Maillard particularly interesting

Unmarried men have little security in childrearing and reproductive outcomes because it is assumed that they have no interest in being responsible.

There seems to be a strong cultural bias towards the position that men (particularly unmarried men) are inherrently irresponsible and inclined to abandon children. The evidence I've seen doesn't support this. I've read that 80% of unmarried fathers express the desire to be a part of their child's life, and that fear of losing child custody is the primary reason that married men infrequently initiate divorces involving children.

How do you feel about this? Do you think this perception of men is accurate? Am I, and Professor Maillard, correct that these attitudes toward men are pervasive?

[–]Sortarius 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Absolutely they are pervasive. I saw an excellent article recently about the myth of the Deadbeat Dad and it's origins. I see it all the time in liberal and progressive publications when they assert men are abandoning fatherhood and shirking responsibility at record rates (based on the increase in single motherhood).

[–][削除されました]  (18子コメント)

[deleted]

    [–]Ciceros_Assassin 8ポイント9ポイント  (17子コメント)

    How is it a false dichotomy? It's the crux of the issue. "Do the groups that purport to stand for father's rights really stand for father's rights, or is it a smokescreen for the broader anti-feminist men's movement"? That's worth figuring out.

    For instance, we've discussed domestic violence against men quite a bit in this space. It's an issue, and one worth addressing, and it's important to have an honest accounting of the issue in order to make good policy decisions. Now, when Fathers for Equal Rights, a prominent father's rights group, presents stats that say that women are equally, if not more, aggressive than men in IPV, do they mention that when you look at severity, women suffer severe physical injury from IPV at nearly double the rate of men? Of course they don't - they go on to talk about IPV in lesbian relationships, because that's a father's rights issue, apparently. "The Facts Don't Lie"? I guess not, as long as you're only presenting the ones that further your agenda.

    "Are you a feminist, or someone who supports equal parenting rights" is a false dichotomy - but that's not the question they asked.

    [–]Minos_Terrible 8ポイント9ポイント  (15子コメント)

    Well, take this as an example - father's rights groups lobbied for a rebuttable presumption of 50/50 custody in the event of divorce. The National Organization of Women put out an "action alert" warning that these groups' true intention was to give abusers more power over their victims.

    How, exactly do you expect father's rights groups to ally themselves with groups that accuse them of being pro abuse? How would you react to being called abusive for simply saying: I want to be more active in my child's life?

    As for your comments on domestic violence. The injury disparity exists for quite a few reasons. First, men are more physically strong than women; so men are more able to do more damage. Second, men dont report their injuries or seek medical help for their injuries as often as women. For example, doctors are usually required, by law, to ask women if their injuries are the result of domestic vience. Finally, there is a lack of resources for abused men. If they seek out a DV shelter or call the cops they will likely be blamed despite being the victim.

    If they have children in a domestic violence situation, the best strategy for most men is to shut up and take it. If they speak up or seek help, they face the risk of losing their children and being labeled as the abusive party.

    [–]Ciceros_Assassin -4ポイント-3ポイント  (14子コメント)

    I'm not really trying to argue the merits of any other claims than the one that there's an argument to be made that some father's rights groups diminish DV victims as part of their narrative. IMO, Fathers for Equal Rights's characterization of DV stats without the context needed to truly understand them is evidence of that.

    I'll tell you, people bring up the NOW vs. shared custody talking point a lot, and I've been reading up on it, and all I'm going to say right now is that it's a lot more complex than general knowledge on the issue would lead you to believe.

    Thanks for the reply.

    [–][削除されました]  (6子コメント)

    [deleted]

      [–]Minos_Terrible 2ポイント3ポイント  (6子コメント)

      Men's rights groups are fighting an uphill battle to convince people that men are capable of being victims of domestic violence, and that women are capable of committing domestic violence.

      They aren't diminishing any victims of DV by advocating their position. It is people like you who are diminishing male victims by trying to inject "but what about the women?" into a conversation about male victims of DV.

      "Sure, your wife threw a plate at your head, beat your son, and then threatened to tell the cops you beat her if you called them, but since you didnt end up with severe physical injuries, it doesnt count."

      [–]Ciceros_Assassin -2ポイント-1ポイント  (5子コメント)

      Ok, except the conversation isn't about male victims of DV. It's about father's rights groups and the potential issues with them.

      [–]Minos_Terrible 5ポイント6ポイント  (4子コメント)

      And the "issue" you have with them is with their position on male victims of domestic violence.

      Your position appears to be that they dishonestly present men as victims of DV without acknowledging that women are more likely to be injured. I fail to see how your point is relevant or how "at least you didnt end up in the hospital" is any solace to a man in an abusive relationship.

      Like I said, these men's issues groups are fighting an uphill battle to get people to recognize that women are capable of committing domestic violence, and that men are capable of being victimized.

      [–]Ciceros_Assassin 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

      No, my issue doesn't have anything to do with male DV victims. As per the context of the actual conversation, I take issue with the way this particular group characterizes DV stats WRT female victims. Which is what we're talking about - that it's possible to agree with the specific claim that father's rights groups diminish victims of DV.

      I mean, look around. MensLib has been talking about male DV victims since day one, and you don't have to go far back in my history to find outspoken support for increasing awareness and resources for men in those situations.

      You're trying really hard to believe I'm taking a position I don't agree with, on the wrong side of an argument I wasn't even having.

      [–]Minos_Terrible 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

      I take issue with the way this particular group characterizes DV stats WRT female victims

      Ok. Fair enough. I likely read too much into your comment.

      [–]Ciceros_Assassin 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Hey, no problem. Please know that you don't have to look farther than me for an ally in the cause of taking male DV seriously and expanding resources and support for men grappling with that.

      [–]Kareem_Jordan 8ポイント9ポイント  (20子コメント)

      A social movement that promotes equal rights for men who want to parent their children is essentially feminist. But the current fathers’ rights movement is not.

      Then don't get involved with those groups, but support the rights of fathers. It's really that simple and anything else is just an attempt to co-opt.

      [–][削除されました]  (19子コメント)

      [deleted]

        [–]sharpandpointless 2ポイント3ポイント  (4子コメント)

        Wait wait wait wait wait wait wait.....there's a county named "Yolo"?

        [–]Man-jusri[S] 3ポイント4ポイント  (3子コメント)

        Yes. It has the highest per capita number of tattoo parlors, and the lowest average level of education of any county in the country.

        [–]sharpandpointless 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

        That seems kind of fitting actually

        [–]Terraneaux 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

        It's sarcasm...

        [–]sharpandpointless 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Yeah that doesn't translate well into print

        [–]Ciceros_Assassin 6ポイント7ポイント  (13子コメント)

        You're jumping to some pretty far-fetched conclusions here.

        First of all, the clinic you're calling out is a clinical program at a law school for law students to get experience helping DV victims with legal issues - it's not an intake shelter or anything like that. The clinic's webpage doesn't mention anything at all about the Duluth model, and though it acknowledges that it mainly serves poor and working women, there's nothing there that indicates it isn't an equal-access service.

        Second, and more importantly, you're conflating what she actually said with what you want to believe she's saying so you can continue to flog your pet issue. What she's actually saying is that father's rights groups tend to diminish actual victims of DV - and that's a hard claim to refute if you look at their materials, and the organizations they tend to ally themselves with. Hell, she comes right out at the beginning and says that equal parenting rights is a feminist issue, by which we can extrapolate that she thinks it's a legitimate issue. Her criticism is of the "current father's rights movement."

        [–][削除されました]  (10子コメント)

        [deleted]

          [–]Ciceros_Assassin 2ポイント3ポイント  (8子コメント)

          Yeah, sorry about that, I missed that it was about AMR. I retracted the statement.

          As far as the author's values on the issue, I read it differently, but it may just be one of those places where there's room for honest disagreement. The way I read it, she's not necessarily advocating for one approach, so much as calling out father's rights groups for diminishing the experiences of actual DV victims (under Duluth or otherwise, it doesn't really matter to that discussion). Certainly we should be able to agree that that criticism holds for the fringe father's rights groups. As regards more moderate groups, her argument certainly would be easier to evaluate if she had provided specific examples of the behavior she's calling out.

          [–]Man-jusri[S] 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

          I hate to intervene in the discussion between you and u/cellardoor3, but I feel some responsibility for the direction this thread has taken. There were 5 opinions expressed in the OP discussion, but only one has so far been addressed in the comments. I should have anticipated that that one opinion would spark controversy, and been more proactive about directing the discussion in my explanatory comment. Accordingly, I've edited my comment to reflect the aspect of the discussion that prompted me to make this post. Feel free to continue discussing domestic violence, but that's not really what I was hoping for when I posted this.

          [–]Ciceros_Assassin 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

          No, I'm glad for the redirect. I think this is a great post, and we've gone off on a tangent for sure. I'm working on some stuff at the moment, but I'd like to dig in on some of the other perspectives presented here with you in a little while.

          [–][削除されました]  (5子コメント)

          [deleted]

            [–]Ciceros_Assassin 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

            Or, you know, you could just read what I wrote in the context I wrote it: fringe father's rights groups as opposed to moderate father's rights groups. Also, I don't know how you possibly could have such a grudge against Behre, given that her career doesn't seem to be all that long, and that this op-ed is, like, the only public statement she's made on anything, as far as I could tell from a quick Google. And "tautological fallacy," lol, are you sure I didn't ad-hom a strawman? Or is it the other way around?

            The cognitive loops you jump through willingly to

            ...immediately assume bad faith is what amazes me, so this is a polite request to abide by the civility guidelines of this community.

            [–][削除されました]  (3子コメント)

            [deleted]

              [–]Ciceros_Assassin[M] 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

              Bud, you came into this conversation, and right off the bat you're slinging around a nasty, accusatory, combative tone. That's not what we're about here. The prior message wasn't an official warning, but this one is.

              [–][削除されました]  (1子コメント)

              [deleted]

                [–]Man-jusri[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

                In fairness, I believe u/cellardoor3 was referring to AMR as the place where 'reason goes to die', not Menslib - unless I'm reading the wrong comment.

                [–]Ciceros_Assassin 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

                Ah, you're right, that was my mistake. I'll edit my first comment.