A photo from the Great Depression urging men looking for work to go away.

Let's say someone had intervened with the Chamber of Commerce here to try to allow the men to stay and look for work. What--in this patriarchy where men had everything and women had nothing--do you think their very first argument in support of the men would have been?

"Tell you what Glenn, how about devoting an entire section to the fathers who make divorce a necessity, if not a blessing? How about discussing the millions of fathers who help make kids, then abandon them?

"But that'll never happen because you're too preoccupied with providing a crying towel for a bunch of puerile, misogynist, bitter men, who would rather blame the system and their former wives/girlfriends than lend a hand with their kids."

A letter from Cheryl, a fan. Cheryl writes:

Every time a 'poor me, I'm discriminated against, I'm a victim of double standards, women get all the breaks' site pops up on the internet, I get a good laugh. I took the time to view your various complaints, and I've come to the conclusion that you're a whiny, self-absorbed male who vents his spleen at women and "feminists" in general, instead of advising fathers to accept and live up to their obligations and responsibilities.

You can bitch all you want about the 'inequities' of divorce and child support, but WOMEN have always borne the brunt of the aftermath of divorce, including child care.

My mother raised 7 kids by herself. As we grew up, all of us worked to make ends meet. She received food stamps once. We were never on welfare. She was a young woman during the decades where females were discouraged from being in the workforce, and discriminated against if they were.

The men's story?: My biological father cared more for the horse track than he did his own family. Suffice it to say that he was nothing more than a sperm donor. My mother divorced him when I was 3 and my baby sister was 1 1/2, after 11 years of marriage. She never demanded alimony, just child support. He skipped town and never paid one red cent. That was in 1960.

My former step father was a child-abusing drunk, who made our lives, especially mine, a living hell, for 8 years. I was 4 when my mother married that bastard and 12 when she finally kicked him out.

I see you have a special interest in the issue of domestic violence. How's this for a sample?: My mother was forced, more than once, to knock the shit out of him due to his filthy mouth and verbal and physical threats. I remember her kicking open a bedroom door after he had shoved her and fled, and backhanding him so hard he fell across the bed. She was 8 months pregnant with my brother at the time. The cops were at our house so many times, I lost count. He initiated the fights, and put the family through unimaginable emotional and financial strain.

When she finally divorced him after 10 years, he also skipped town. No child support for his stepchildren nor for his biological children.

Before you criticize her choice in men, let me point out two things: The first time she married for love, the second time for practicality. Neither one of her former husbands revealed their complete, true nature until after the nuptials. Ain't that a kick in the ass? But then, women are accused of that all the time, aren't we?

Tell you what Glenn, how about devoting an entire section to the fathers who make divorce a necessity, if not a blessing? How about discussing the millions of fathers who help make kids, then abandon them?

But that'll never happen because you're too preoccupied with providing a crying towel for a bunch of puerile, misogynist, bitter men, who would rather blame the system and their former wives/girlfriends than lend a hand with their kids.

Recently my mother and father celebrated their 46th wedding anniversary.  They are pictured at their wedding.  It's funny, I always kid my son that he thinks I was born old, but I was humbled looking at their wedding album--my parents looked so young.  When I mentioned this to my mother she said matter-of-factly, "But we were young." And doesn't my mother look beautiful?

Growing up, of course, I had no idea how lucky I was to have a good, stable, two-parent family.  My mother almost died twice when I was very young, once from cancer and once from a ruptured appendix.  Though she was always plagued with health problems to one degree or another, she was always there for me, which of course I did not fully appreciate at the time.

Nor did I appreciate my father's sacrifices, working long hours in order to provide for us and to make sure that my mother always had the medical attention she needed.  When I was a child, my father always had two pictures on his desk.  One was a picture of my little sister standing in front of the refrigerator.  The other one was of me.

My mother and father were fortunate, in that they certainly were meant for each other.  However, like most couples, they sometimes fought, yelled, and clashed. I am eternally grateful that they always worked out their problems, as opposed to giving up. They are now 80-years-old, but are both still very much in love.

After their anniversary party last year (for #45), I had to be careful when I put their reclining chairs back, because they need to be placed in such a way that they can hold hands while they watch TV together.

At the party I explained how when I was a teenager I told my dad that I thought he lived a pathetic existence and I did not understand why he had much will to live at all. My father would smile and say "I have a great life--someday you'll understand." At the party I explained that now my teenage son thinks that I live a pathetic existence and that I have no life. My son nodded in agreement.

There were many other couples at the party who raised children and had long, happy marriages.  My uncle Dave and my aunt Helen celebrate their 46th wedding anniversary in January.  My parents' friends Dave and Ute met when Dave was stationed in the Army in Germany in the 1950s and they have been together ever since.  Another couple there, Dick and Shirley,  had been married for 59 years.  Perhaps it is men and women like these who are the true heroes in our society.

Recently I wrote about UK Fathers 4 Justice's Jolly Stanesby, a divorced father of one, who has carried out numerous daring, creative protests.

Stanesby is a registered child care provider and is thus allowed to care for any child in England except his own, who he is barred from calling and is allowed to see only four days a month.

Recently Stanesby was jailed for his role in a rooftop protest at the home of Deputy Prime Minister Harriett Harman. To learn more, click here.

Stanesby's partner in "crime" was UK fatherhood activist Mark Harris, who went through a terrible ordeal during his divorce. Below we reprint a blog post I wrote about Harris earlier this year.

F4J Protester's Daughter: 'I'm Proud of My Dad'

"Her life has been blighted by years of enforced separation from the father she clearly adores.

"'Most people look back on their childhood and remember family days out at the seaside and birthday parties,' she says. 'My recollections are of Mum, sour-faced in a suit, heading off for yet another court appearance and endless interviews with social workers and child psychologists, all telling me that I didn't have to see my dad if I didn't want to.'"

Has the case for family law reform ever been laid out better? From Justice 4 my father, says daughter of rooftop protester (Daily Mail, 6/9/08):

On Sunday morning, just hours before he scrambled on to the roof of Harriet Harman's home dressed as a superhero, Mark Harris kissed and hugged his daughter Lisa and set off from the South Devon home they share.

'I told him I was proud of him,' says Lisa, a 21-year-old wages clerk. 'I said that however long he managed to stay up there, I would be cheering him on and sending him my love.'

In the end, Mark, who staged his weekend protest with fellow Fathers 4 Justice campaigner Jolly Stanesby, stayed on the roof of Ms. Harman's elegant period home in Herne Hill, South London, for ten hours - an hour for every year that his own case wasn't resolved by the courts.

When he climbed down on Sunday night, he was immediately arrested and detained by police, leaving Mr. Stanesby perched precariously on the slates, stubbornly insisting he wouldn't descend until Mark had been released.

But then as Lisa points out, brushes with the law are nothing new to her 49-year-old father. During the decade he spent fighting for full access to his three daughters after his wife walked out and took them with her, the driving instructor faced 133 court appearances before 33 different judges, two stints in jail and went on a hunger strike.

The irony is that Mark's case is now resolved: Lisa, his eldest, now lives with him. So does his 17-year-old daughter. Another daughter, aged 15, lives nearby with her mother, but visits at least twice a week. He now has everything he fought for.

But he still donned Superman's leotard, tights and cape because while he is free to talk about the horrors he suffered at the hands of the British justice system, other fathers are not...

'He hasn't forgotten what he went through,' says Lisa. 'He still has a lot of anger about it and he wants to do what he can to help other fathers in the same position.'

If it seems strange that Mark is still angry about his own ordeal, then as Lisa is quick to remind anyone who asks, until she was 16 - and legally able to choose for herself which parent she wanted to live with - she hardly knew her father at all.

Her life has been blighted by years of enforced separation from the father she clearly adores.

'Most people look back on their childhood and remember family days out at the seaside and birthday parties,' she says. 'My recollections are of Mum, sour-faced in a suit, heading off for yet another court appearance and endless interviews with social workers and child psychologists, all telling me that I didn't have to see my dad if I didn't want to.'

Read the full Daily Mail article here. Mark and Lisa are pictured above.

[From Robert Franklin]

In my recent blog post 'When women behave badly, we seek to understand; when men behave badly, we condemn them' I wrote:

Here’s another case of a mother apparently killing her children. Although we don’t know exactly what happened, we do know it’s a terrible tragedy. The story is here.

From where I stand, there are two issues about the way this is reported. First the article says nothing about the boys’ father. Is he alive? Where is he? Did he play any part in these children’s lives? If not, why not? It’s a powerful condemnation of the society we live in that fathers seem to be so marginalized that they don’t even bare mentioning in stories like these.

Second, note the way the mother is referred to. Her behavior, according to the story was “a cry for help.” If a father had murdered his toddlers, would we say he was crying out for help? I’ve never seen it and I frankly don’t expect to.

So this story falls into the familiar pattern – when women behave badly, we seek to understand why; when men behave badly, we judge and condemn them. One approach is love and understanding; the other is condemnation. The difference is based on the sex of the bad actor.

Read my full post here.

Now feminist blogger Barry Deutsch has posted on his blog to explain to us that it’s OK to treat male and female child killers differently because “mothers and fathers murder for very different reasons.” Not only that, but “all the research agrees” that this is true. The link to the post is here.

That got my attention, so I checked on the sources he cited. And guess what; it turns out to be not quite so simple.

It turns out that, according to Deutsch’s own citations, while men and women’s motivations for killing their children TEND to differ, there is a great deal of overlap too. For example, “retaliating” against the child or the other parent was the primary motivation of fathers in six cases of filicide (child killing by a parent), and mothers in three cases. Parental psychosis was the primary motivation of three men and five women.

On the other hand, “unwanted child” was the primary motivation for nine women but no men in the filicides studied. Therefore, sometimes men and women act similarly and sometimes differently, which is kind of what you’d expect. That is, you’d expect that unless you’re bent on condemning men and excusing women, which my original post complained about and which Deutsch does.

So Deutsch is just flat wrong and his own citations show it. But he’s not content with that. In a remarkable bit of literary sleight-of-hand, he moves from claiming that men and women are motivated differently to claiming that women who kill their children are in the throes of “postpartum madness” when they do so. And of course men aren’t.

Again, his own data directly contradict that claim. As stated earlier, in only five cases were women motivated by psychosis as opposed to nine different cases of neonaticide (killing of a newborn).

As I’ve said before, this type of argument is both anti-male and anti-female. By claiming that women’s filicide is excusable (due to diminished capacity) while men’s is not, Deutsch promotes the idea that women are more qualified to raise children than are men. That not only tends to deprive men of their children, it tends to deprive women of equality in the workplace. After all, if men can’t be trusted with children, women will end up doing more childcare and less paid work.

There was a time when feminists opposed that.

[Note: Reader Robert Franklin, a retired business attorney, has joined the blogging team at www.glennsacks.com. All of Robert's posts are available here.

As always, we ask that if you decide to post on others' blogs--in this case Deutsch's--that you be polite and respectful--GS]

Glenn's E-Newsletter/Week in Review (12/2/08)

Michelle Malkin, Glenn Reynolds Hold up Our DART Campaign as a Model for 21st Century Activism

Our Campaign Protesting Father-Bashing Domestic Violence Ads was recently praised on PJTV by two prominent commentators--Michelle Malkin and Glenn Reynolds.

Malkin is a syndicated columnist whose columns appear in nearly 200 newspapers, the author of three books, and a frequent TV and radio commentator.

Reynolds' blog, www.Instapundit.com, is perhaps the most-read political blog in the US, and he is an author and frequent TV commentator.

Malkin and Reynolds were discussing the controversial "No on 8" pro-gay marriage protests, as well as ways the Republicans can recover from their recent electoral defeat. Our DART campaign--launched by Fathers & Families and I at the end of October--was held up as a model for 21st century political activism.

To read and watch what they said or to comment on this issue, click here.

Teen Boy Must 'register as sex offender for life after having sex with his girlfriend' 

"An Oklahoma teenager is swept up in laws aimed at protecting kids from child predators. He must register as a sex offender for life, as the worst level offender, after having a sex with his girlfriend, who said she was his age, 16...

"[T]he district attorney charged Ricky as an adult for two counts of felony sex abuse of a child. He was facing 25 years in prison..."

More anti-male sex hysteria. From Teen Feels Snared In Sex Offender Law (www.newson6.com, 11/7/08):

TULSA, OK -- An Oklahoma teenager is swept up in laws aimed at protecting kids from child predators. He must register as a sex offender for life, as the worst level offender, after having a sex with his girlfriend, who said she was his age, 16. Sex between teenagers is no longer just a moral issue, it's a legal one.

Ricky (pictured) grew up dreaming of joining the Navy and becoming a police officer. He was 16 and living in Iowa when he met a girl at a club for kids 16 to 20 years old. He says she told him she was nearly 16. They began dating and had sex. Soon after, police questioned him.

"The cop asked me, did you have sex with her? And, I said twice. He said sign this statement and I signed it. Soon as I got done signing it, he said, sorry to let you know, she's only 13," said Ricky.

Ricky's mother, who has recently gone blind, met with the girl's parents.

"They said, look, we know she lied, we don't want to press charges, we just want Ricky to say away from her and I said okay," said Ricky's mom, Mary.

But, the district attorney charged Ricky as an adult for two counts of felony sex abuse of a child. He was facing 25 years in prison, so he pleaded guilty and got a deferred sentence, which means it would expunged off his record.

Ricky and his mother moved back to Oklahoma and learned he must register as a sex offender for life in Oklahoma as an aggravated offender, the highest level.

That means he'll have to forget his dreams or even getting a job.

"I read one application that said if you answer yes to sex offender, this does not make us not hire you, but, it does. If you say you're a sex offender, automatically, you're not getting a job," said Ricky.

Ricky's record was expunged last month, but Oklahoma won't take him off the registry.

"With the expungement, there is no plea now. It's gone, no record anymore, so no plea, why is he on this registry?" said Ricky's mother, Mary.

Ricky now educates teenagers as his mother works to get the law reformed.

Police officers told The News On 6 the law started good, but as it's been added to, it's become a "screwed up mess."

They also believe the laws must be reformed to protect children from dangerous sex offenders and also, teenagers like Ricky.

The accompanying video can be found here.

For more details about this injustice and to fill out a petition, see the website http://www.rickyslife.com

Mary, Ricky’s mom, can be reached at rickyslife@windstream.net.

To comment on this issue, click here.

Some of the other issues I'm covering this week include:  Village Voice Slams Our DART Campaign

On Love & Loyalty...

An Old Inn & a Ghost Story

Woman Abuse Prevention Month

'She has no reason to stop stealing because there are no significant consequences'

Hero Father Mauled Saving Little Daughter's Life

'The media falsely report that gender-based pricing in health insurance uniquely penalizes women'

Sounds Like Women's Studies...

Biology professor: 'I refuse, on principle, to participate in sexual harassment training'

New Teen Violence Report Gives Short Shrift to Fathers

Since We're Giving Thanks & the Subject of East Germany Came Up Recently...

An 'unusual Thanksgiving for an 8-year-old boy'?

Late Rapper MC Breed--a Victim of the Child Support System?

I'm Surprised the Feminists Haven't Gotten Rid of This One Yet... (Video)

Economy Hitting Women Hardest, Say Experts...

A Pyrrhic Victory for Embattled Father

To comment on what I've written or to join the lively discussion on my website, simply click on the "comments" link below each blog post on my website.

(To avoid the previous confusion, comments on the E-Newsletter itself are disabled--please comment on the individual blog posts themselves.)

Best Wishes,
Glenn Sacks

Syndicated columnist Michelle Malkin and blogger king Glenn Reynolds of www.Instapundit.com recently praised our Campaign Protesting DART's Father-Bashing Domestic Violence Ads on TV. To learn more, click here.

Village Voice writer Roy Edroso didn't like this. In Rightbloggers' "Conservatism 2.0" Closely Resembles Earlier Versions (12/1/08) he wrote:

Last week top rightbloggers Glenn Reynolds and Michelle Malkin held a video conversation about "Conservatism 2.0." Their 1990s-Fast Company cognomen refers to a future direction for the Right, but from their discussion their new direction is rather like their old one...

They also discussed the "tolerance bullying" of gays angry about Proposition 8 [the CA. anti-gay marriage ballot initiative], who'd pressured a film festival director out of his job. While allowing that "people have a right to speak out," Reynolds said that he was "absolutely certain that had Proposition 8 supporters done this... we'd be hearing cries of McCarthyism." Then he mentioned the efforts of radio host Glenn Sacks and others to get some public transit ads about domestic abuse pulled. (Sacks was offended by the ads' suggestion that many boys grow up to beat women.) The Sacks squad "made a very big point about being polite about it," said Reynolds.

This politeness is evident in Sacks' own account, in which he said that "several financial contributors" to The Family Place, the service provider that placed the offending ads, "withdrew or reduced the financial gifts they planned for the end-of-the-year giving season" as a result of Sacks' efforts. But Sacks added, "I don't say this with pleasure -- I would have preferred that The Family Place do the right thing from the beginning rather than lose the funding they did." So Conservatism 2.0, it would appear, will distinguish itself from its gay enemies by getting their targets bankrupted rather than fired, and by acting sorry about it afterwards.

I voted against Proposition 8 and favor gays' right to marry, but I am disturbed by some of what I've heard about gay marriage advocates' post-election "bullying" tactics. However, to consider what we did to be similar "bullying" is quite a stretch.

We didn't seek to "bully" The Family Place's financial contributors. Instead, selected activists politely brought the ads to the contributors' attention and pointed out that they are unfair to fathers, bad for children, and an embarrassment to The Family Place. Many of their financial contributors agreed. It was executed very well.

On a larger level, I can't think of any kind of effective protest anywhere on behalf of any cause or issue that can't be criticized as rude or inappropriate or whatever.

Boycotts are often called "bullying," as are angry demonstrations.

Demonstrate on a bridge and you'll be crucified for blocking traffic.

Angrily protest and you'll be portrayed as bitter and half-crazed. Protest in a humorous way in costume (like Fathers 4 Justice does in the UK) and critics will label you clowns who aren't serious.

When the gays marched here in Los Angeles to protest after Proposition 8's passage, people got mad at them for blocking traffic. They were protesting in largely friendly territory, so people said "Why inflict this disruption on us? We voted against Proposition 8. Go protest in areas which voted for it." Of course, if they go to conservative areas (perhaps like Orange County) and protest, they're called bullies and residents will say they're afraid of them.

All in all, it reminds me of a sign a former colleague of mine posted over his classroom door:

Avoid Criticism
Say Nothing, Do Nothing, Be Nothing

To comment on the Village Voice article, click here and go to the bottom of the page.

Our Campaign Protesting Father-Bashing Domestic Violence Ads was recently praised on PJTV by two prominent commentators--Michelle Malkin and Glenn Reynolds.

Malkin is a syndicated columnist whose columns appear in nearly 200 newspapers, the author of three books, and a frequent TV and radio commentator.

Reynolds' blog, www.Instapundit.com, is perhaps the most-read political blog in the US, and he is an author and frequent TV commentator.

Malkin and Reynolds were discussing the controversial "No on 8" pro-gay marriage protests, as well as ways the Republicans can recover from their recent electoral defeat. Our DART campaign--launched by Fathers & Families and I at the end of October--was held up as a model for 21st century political activism. Reynolds said:

I’ve actually got an example of how to do this right...Glenn Sacks' campaign against some of the ads on public transit in Dallas...ads about domestic violence...

As usual, the statistics were dubious to begin with, and the ads stereotype by gender...if you're a man you're going to be a perpetrator of domestic violence more likely than not or such. It was really quite offensive--a lot of people were offended.

What Glenn Sacks and [Fathers & Families] did, they didn't try to get anybody fired. They did complain to DART (Dallas Area Rapid Transit) about the ads...they did actually find the domestic violence provider's top 50 donors.

They didn't try to get anybody fired but they contacted them and asked them, "Did you realize that your money is supporting these ads? Is this what you want to do?"

They made a very big point of being very polite about it and not making any threats. They did get some action and did it without trying to get anybody fired or booted from their jobs or doing anything vicious.

That's an example of how it ought to be done. That's something that people on the right should be looking at...for the [next four years.]

Malkin agreed, adding:

Glenn Sacks has been very effective in getting his message out and rectifying unbalances in media coverage and advertising. You would hope that [other activists] would take a cue and a clue from this type of campaign.

The video can be seen at here--the discussion of our campaign starts at 15 minutes in.

An interesting perspective...thanks to Chris, a reader, for sending it.

Now and then (but not often enough) my wife and I palm our kids off on my parents or friends and sneak out of town for a day or two. Recently I took my wife to the Historic Inn (built in 1889) pictured above.

It was great, but somewhat bizarre. I guess the hotel and the little town it's in have a peak season and an off season--a very off season. As best I could tell, my wife and I were the only guests at the Inn, and the proprietor wasn't even there most of the time. He gave us a key to our room and to the front door and said, "If you leave, please remember to lock up."

The place was gorgeous, elegant, and full of history, but it was very strange being the only people in this old Inn. My wife, despite having two graduate degrees, believes in ghosts, and was somewhat unnerved by it. I liked it.

On to the more important issue--my daughter likes ghost stories. Beyond La Llorona, A Christmas Carol, and some others, I'm about tapped out. Anybody have a good one?