British Study Asks: Nature or Nurture?
Sunday July 6, 2008
Researchers at the University of Birmingham in Great Britain have completed a study on what constitutes meaningful fatherhood. With growing fathers' rights concerns in Great Britain (and in other countries), the study explored whether being the biological dad or being a nurturing dad was more important to fathers. The results are in: fathers find greater reward in being involved. One of the authors, John Ivie, said, "All the groups of men that we spoke to felt strongly that to be a father in a meaningful sense you have to provide more than the genetic material.
Being a father meant playing a role in caring, providing and protecting a child. The men felt that this should take precedence over genetics in giving men a say in a child's life." Read a summary of the study results and let us know if you agree or disagree.
Comments
I think the marriage strike by Gen X and Y Men will put teach modern princess a lesson.
I’ve always felt that it takes more than DNA to be a dad, but more so before my own rights as a father were threatened. I’m still all for it, as long as it doesn’t become a double standard- yet another mechanism for entitlement mothers and their attorneys to disenfranchise men from the parenting process. Another basis for litigants to attack fathers’ rights as equal parents. It would be interesting to see what women as a focus group would say about a woman’s right to be a mother by virtue of genetics.
Others before me have described the origins of cultural Marxism, of which
feminism and political correctness are the most dominant contemporary forms.
I have already listed the Free Congress Foundation’s excellent documentary
on the subject, and another excellent source is Gross and Levitt’s ‘Higher
Superstition’
As they argue, what the revolutionaries of 1968 failed to achieve on the
barricades, they continued in their professional lives, and particularly in
the academic classroom.
Twentieth century Marxists realized that classical Marxism wasn’t working,
and that Marxist economics was a failure, so they switched their attention
to culture instead, attacking marriage and the family, and penetrating
education, the media, the civil service and the charity and voluntary
sectors, even the churches, in order to promote their agenda, by undermining
all the principal institutions of Western society.
Today, sectors traditionally regarded as ‘women’s issues’, such as child
protection and domestic violence, are completely under the control of
radical Marxist-feminists, with catastrophic consequences. Divorce has been
promoted as a form of revolution. Every family they break up, every man they
destroy, is another blow for the revolution.
Margaret Thatcher, whom I hated at the time, but respect more on hindsight,
did a lot to undermine classical Marxism in Britain, by confronting the
Marxist-dominated trade unions. Unfortunately, though, she did very little
to combat cultural Marxism. Like most people, she was probably largely
unaware of it, while living in the middle of it. Perhaps we need another
leader like her to take on the anti-family movement. I don’t see any sign of
that happening in the immediate future though.
My own view is that cultural Marxism will be killed off in the end by
globalization.
Middle-class women in this country have been trained from birth to despise
men, and to regard marriage as slavery. They are refusing to get married and
have children. We are short of workers, and so we have large numbers of
immigrants from places like Poland and Eastern Europe. These people lived
under Marxism and hated it. They are now re-embracing religion, getting
married and having families. These immigrant communities are an enormous
asset to us in combating cultural Marxism.
At the same time, many western men, such as myself, have given up on western
women altogether. The ‘marriage strike’ is a growing concept in the men’s
movement. They have created a situation in which getting married is just not
worth it for men. No doubt they did this deliberately; providing economic
and cultural disincentives to marry is a very effective way of undermining
marriage. However, they reckoned without the effects of globalization. The
marriage strike should only apply to Western women in my view. We should be
actively seeking foreign brides, who will give us the kind of marriage we
want.
Of course there is a movement against this, by decrying any man who takes a
foreign wife as desperate, or a sexual deviant. The US has even enacted a
law called IMBRA to try to prevent American men taking foreign brides. The
feminists can already see the danger that the marriage strike and
globalization present.
It won’t be long before these feminists realize that for all their big
offices and power-suits, they are going to die alone and childless. It is an
evolutionary dead-end.
Young women are already saying that they aspire to be footballers’ wives or
glamour models rather than captains of industry.
Meanwhile, science is progressing rapidly in evolutionary theory and
life-sciences, and the dogma of the 1960s, that everything is socially
constructed, is fading fast, both in academia and in popular culture.
This century is going to see the rise of China and India as major powers,
and we will be competing with them in a global economy. Cultural Marxism
will not be at the top of their agenda. Making money will. We are being
crippled by cultural Marxism, and we either confront it or we lose out to
other countries.
Feminism is based on Marxism, and on the politics of envy, and sustains
itself by lies and deception. It cannot last forever. Feminism is doomed in
the long term, a historical flash in the pan, just like the Soviet Union.
They dream of bringing about a global revolution, but this is simply not
going to happen. The factors I have described will come together within the
next generation or so, and that will be the end of it, one way or the other.
Western society will either recover itself in time or disappear forever, but
whichever way it goes, and although it may be too late for you and I, human
life will continue just as it always has.
Hmmm.. You need to get with it and that young women do not despise marriage etc they simple want more from life than being a housewife. They want equal rights to men.. and why the hell not!! I think if you want to get a foreign wife imported is pretty pathetic as you simple want a simple little life with a simple little wife who wouldn’t say boo to you. Sort it out, which is not reality, open you mind.
Confession of a feminazi
As I write this, I am aware that I am probably going to offend some readers, but, then again, I have found that we in society are afraid and unaccepting of the truth, therefore taking offense. I can not apologize for what I am about to say, however I can only hope to attempt to undo the wrong that I have done.
To start with, here is a little bit about myself. Before I was married, I was an extreme feminist, with the hopes and dreams of equality, having the same thoughts and beliefs as others in the fight for true equality. It wasn’t like the feminists of today, who only want to gain complete control, power, and to have revenge, destroying everything that the true feminists have fought so hard for (true gender equality). It is my hope that by posting my story and comments, that it will encourage other women, (we/you know who you are), to come forward and to tell the truth about themselves and their experience. Here is my story, as shameful as it may be.
I am a single mother of two. When I decided to leave my marriage, (I was bored), I went to three different lawyers for advice. I was asked by all 3 of them if I was ever abused by my husband. My answer was, never in any way shape or form was my husband abusive towards me. To my utter disbelief, all of them told me the same thing. Unless I accused my husband of abuse, I would not gain sole custody of my children. They also told me that by making these allegations against him, that I would get EVERYTHING and more. When I asked them how we would prove the allegations, I was told that the courts don’t require proof, and to go to a women’s shelter, and that they would help me, and that it would support my allegations of abuse.
Having been brought up in a very religious family, I was very uncomfortable with this advice. I was then told by the lawyers, that if I wanted the full support of legal aid, I had no choice but to make the allegations against my husband. Having no money to pay for legal expenses, I did as I was advised. Reluctantly I took my children to a women’s shelter. I couldn’t believe what I was seeing. On the outside, it appears as they want the public and their funders to see it. This is however, far from the truth.
This place was a form of a cult, (for lack of a better term). Male bashing was a top priority, and the administration was very adamant about recruiting yet another woman (me), to join this man-haters club. They even have a game plan on how to win in court. By following their simple plan step by step, I would not only get sole custody of my children, but also the car, house and land, plus finances for the rest of my life.
However, if I did not follow their game plan, but if I played fairly, I would lose everything, and I would be endangering the lives of other women, and would jeopardize any funding for them. The administration must have noticed that their brain washing techniques were not working as fast as they wanted, so I was ‘thrown’ at the other women staying there.
Terms such as ’sperm donors’, and that all men were abusive and must die, were used on a daily basis. They were very convincing, and not wanting to jeopardize my fellow house mates, I went along with their game plan.
As soon as I said that I would follow their game plan, things moved very quickly. I saw the man that I was once married to destroyed emotionally, financially and physically. I was granted sole custody of our children, and because of a restraining order, I gained the house and car, so that our children wouldn’t lose everything that they were used to.
Not only was there a restraining order against him, he was also charged with assault. The man who had equally created our children, helped raise them, and who loves them dearly, was ordered to stay away from them, and to pay me, (more than I ever needed), support for them. Like I said, I destroyed him, leaving him with very little to survive.
My brother is now going through a custody battle, where my former sister-in-law is playing exactly the same game that was taught to me by a women’s shelter, and my brother is in the same shoes that I once put my ex in.
Knowing how I destroyed my ex, and seeing the wrong that I had committed, I have made it my personal endeavor to help my brother with his fight. He recently joined a men’s group, and he receives messages on the net from shared parenting, epoc_news etc.
As he was thrown out of his home, he now lives with me, which gives me the opportunity to read the messages from these groups. I must admit, sometimes there is a message or two that is of great help, but for the most part, these groups have to stop playing ‘Mr. Nice Guy’.