Moms Make Lousy Dads
by Burt PrelutskyIn her new book, “Guilty,” Ann Coulter committed the major heresy of suggesting that children should ideally be raised by a mother and a father, not by two men or two women or even by one woman. She created a firestorm, as she usually does when she’s releasing a new book, with crowds of single women coming after her with torches and pitchforks and other crowds lining up at Borders and Barnes & Noble.
The fact is, she’s right. That’s not to say that a great many women aren’t forced by the circumstance of being divorced or widowed to be single mothers. But, more and more women, thanks to Hollywood role models, are choosing to be single mothers, and that’s a terrible trend, leading as it inevitably will to more and more criminals, druggies and psychopaths.
One of the more fatuous beliefs that has been foisted off by self-proclaimed feminists and other politically correct lamebrains is that children don’t really need fathers. I used to say that American women, thanks to increased salaries and well-stocked sperm banks, had reached a point where they only needed men to open ketchup bottles and get stuff down from high shelves. Ladies, I was joking!
I had no idea that so many women would take my wisecrack to heart. Thanks to my good joke and Gloria Steinem’s bad one — that line about fish needing bicycles — young women have become increasingly wacky. What is really surprising, considering that thirty years of feminist propaganda has promoted the natural superiority of females, is how masculine, in the worst sense of the word, so many women have become.
Surely I am not the only person who has noticed that young women are just as likely as men to be seen smoking outside office buildings, to cuss in public, get wasted on booze and drugs, and perhaps even likelier to drive like maniacs and to flip you off for daring to share the road with them.
In the business world, far too many women salivate at the thought of being regarded as cold and ruthless. They are every bit as likely as men to torment and humiliate their employees, and to promote an atmosphere of fear and anger, especially among their female underlings. Call these women cut-throat and they think you’re trying to sweet talk them.
Perhaps it’s simply a case of Stockholm syndrome gone amuck. As you probably know, that’s a situation in which hostages come to identify, not with their rescuers, but with their captors. Women, in their own defense, might possibly claim that they’d been powerless for so long that it was inevitable that they’d take on the very characteristics they’ve despised. But that’s a load of hooey. I say, if you’re going to behave like an idiot and a bully, don’t make excuses for your boorishness. God knows men don’t!
Understand I am not referring to widows and divorced women who have no choice but to soldier on and do their best for the kids. I am talking about those other ones, the ones who elect to go it alone, the selfish ones who put their own wants and psychological needs ahead of the child’s welfare.
Inasmuch as more and more women are eager to hand off their offspring to a nanny, a granny or a nursery school, you have to wonder why most of them even bother giving birth. It seems all they have to show for the experience are stretch marks.
In a society that is determined to accept the nutty notion that two gay men or a pair of lesbians are just as likely — they really mean likelier– to raise a normal, healthy child as a married man and woman, how could anybody dare suggest that a single woman isn’t equally capable? Well, sorry, but she isn’t. This is especially true when the child is a boy. No matter how hard she tries, no matter how much she cares, no matter how many broken nails she’s willing to sacrifice in order to play catch with the kid, the bottom line is she’s a woman. And just because so many of the morons in Hollywood have turned single motherhood into just another fad, sort of like collagen lips and plastic bosoms, doesn’t make it a good idea.
It simply makes sense that a boy needs a man in his life to act as a role model, to show him not only how to curb his temper and to temper his testosterone, but also how to avoid being feminized into something resembling a well-dressed eunuch.
The point I am looking to make I saw made perfectly in a segment of a TV magazine show some years ago. It seems that in Africa, on a game preserve, the rangers were discovering the mutilated carcasses of several rhinos. They couldn’t determine who was responsible for the carnage, and they couldn’t imagine a motive.
After conducting an investigation, they found to their amazement that a band of teenage elephants were killing the rhinos for no other reason than that they felt like it. It was their version of drive-by shootings. Like our own urban gangs, the young rogues even had a leader.
The rangers thought long and hard about the problem. The first thing they realized was that the teenagers were free to make up their own evil rules of behavior because, like the blood-thirsty kids in “Lord of the Flies,” there were no adults in their world. All the bull elephants had been slaughtered by poachers for their ivory.
Then, because they didn’t have to answer to politicians or social workers, the rangers did two essential things. First, having determined he was incorrigible, they killed the leader of the pack. Next, they flew in several bull elephants. In no time at all, order `was restored. The big guys let it be known that if there was any more rhino-stomping, there would be hell to pay. Their message was short and sweet; namely that elephants don’t behave that way.
So, for all their professional advances, there are still a few things that women simply can’t do as well as men. Some of those things, such as throwing a football forty yards in a perfect spiral or crushing a beer can on their forehead, aren’t all that essential. Important, I’ll grant you, but not absolutely essential to society at large.
However, when it comes to rearing male children, we’d all probably be better off if the ladies simply dropped the kids off in the woods for wolves to raise.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Tips & Feedback
97 Comments
I’m happy that there’s somebody — you — who, like me, has the correct perspective on this.
Oh, yeah, I guess the majority of California voters also have the correct perspective on it, too.
Very heartening to read this kind of stuff coming from the left coast. Like the current myth-making radical environmental movement that once had a reasonable agenda but has now jumped the shark, the women’s movement has gone over the cliff and threatens to take the true, True, family with it. The only way that can happen is if we don’t speak up and tell it like it really is.
Cultural correctness brings chaos, crime, anarchy, not to mention sexual confusion. Boys after the age of 4-5 need real men and fathers even more than they need their mothers. Thank you for writing this here. I’m sending it on to my son and daughter-in-law who have a new little baby boy.
If your world view is that there is no difference between boys and girls, then dads are irrelevant. Its odd how the “rugged individualism” that built this nation, has been replaced with the government as surrogate father. People are no longer individuals but just interchangeable parts of the state.
OMG this is so true and thanks be to god that someone has the balls to say it LOL
For a girl to have a good idea of what kind of man she should marry she should have a great male role model, as in a good father.
That would be best, but sometimes I think it matters even having a BAD role model around, in the sense that at least she can grow up thinking “I don’t want THAT as a boyfriend, husband, or father.”
Which is where TV/Hollywood comes in. One must know there’s a problem raising kids on your own, beyond just finances, before you can do something about it. If you’re raised in a single-mother household, it’s your default family unit, and SOMETHING external needs to have an influence on you to help drive your decision-making in another direction.
I would imagine men can raise children by themselves fairly effectively though, right?
There are very few men who would say that not having a female parent around to help raise children (especially girls) is a good idea. In actuality, I think, men have a far more realistic sense of their own limitations as parents than women. Men just don’t think of themselves as supermen the way so many women think they can be superwomen. There are many women who think the only problem with raising kids on their own is finances, which is just ludicruous, counterintuitive, and not event backed up by any research.
Burt, you are right sort of. It’s not just women. One can attribute some of the decline for the need for fathers and the family unit to the birth control pill and eventually the legilization of abortion. Women began having a choice of when and/or whether they conceived, so it became the sole responsibility of women not to conceive. Therefore, men were no longer required to stand up and accept the responsibility of fatherhood. So it’s not just the women who have cut fathers out, but also, the many men who have willingly abdicated their own responsibility.
I have seen within my family what having a father around to stand up and be active in his child’s life- especially his female child’s life – can do. A father who is around and pulls his child aside to say “hey, you need to straighten up” – boy OR girl – had tremendous influence, and when our daughter was born, one of the things I said to my husband is “dont think your daughter wont notice if you arent there. Dont think your daughter wont need you to stand up and say something when she needs guidance, because youre going to be the first man in her life and she will look to you for reference.” He has taken that to heart and is a very nurturing father.
I tend to think the early whiffs of the feminist movement happened because the fathers had the notion that only the mothers could influence their daughters and they were only responsible for the sons…there were fathers of the ’silent generation’ that said nothing when their daughters went off and did foolish things…the feminist movement sought to try and get men to become more active in their daughters’ lives…unfortunately, it was guided by anger and pride and eventually ugliness into what we see today as a complete rejection of the Male Influence. I dont think men should accept any of that. They shoud never accept the passive “Im not a girl so I cant say anything” whether its a tacit agreement with their wife or under the guise of feminism.
Hope Im making sense. I saw what happened when a very passive silent father was finally called upon to say something to his daughter and his daughter’s reaction to it. Unfortunately, the father went right back to being quiet and passive and the daughter went right back to trying to outwit a mother who wanted to control everything, but indulged any whim her daughter threw at her. This was something I did not want to see with my daughter and I knew the power of a man’s influence.
So Ann is TOTALLY right.
I can see the difference between a woman (or a man) who because of tragic (or unforeseen) circumstances must raise children without a partner (spouse) and do an admirable job of it.
Why can’t Bernice (not her real name.) When we discuss this (which we don’t do any more) she takes offense. “My sperm donor ran out on us and my mother was both Mom and Dad to us!”
Yes, but your mother didn’t implant six eggs and get 8 babies to raise by herself ON PURPOSE!
Your mother didn’t look on you as an accessory. (Baby bumps are so cool this year–click on my name to see toon.)
As bad as it is to be raised with only one gender role-model, it only compounds the problem by having queer parents.
I believe it was David Horowitz that said McDonalds has done more for women & mom’s than the feminist movement ever has.
If feminism had been constructed by selfish, misogynist men—men who are eager to exploit women sexually, emotionally and financially without feeling any trace of guilt or responsibility—would it look any different?
The most difficult job in the world is being a parent.
While I am in agreement with Burt’s post today, the sad reality is he will be dismissed as yet another sexist by pseudo feminists and a hater because he sides with Ann Coulter on the issue.
As undoubtibly will I.
Burt Prelutsky, thank you for stepping up to the plate and hitting a home run.
We will all be better off when we decide to do what’s right for children and give up being afraid of a woman (or a “gay”, or anyone else) having a tantrum.
Gloria Steinem is always given credit for the quip “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.” Actually, it was not her own line but a simple-minded adaptation of an old atheist slogan, “Man needs God like a fish needs a bicycle.”
The semantic implications of the change are curious.
“So, for all their professional advances, there are still a few things that women simply can’t do as well as men.”
Amen to that.
One of my favorite things to do, is to make femino-tards blow a gasket by pointing out the fact that there have never been, nor will there ever be, any female Bachs, Mozarts, or Beethovens; any female Michelangelos, Da Vincis, or Rembrandts; or any female Newtons, Einsteins, or Hawkings. All they can do is respond with spittle-slinging rage, because there isn’t even a single exception to prove this rule: It rises to the level of a truism.
Whether you believe it’s a Divine Plan or the result of evolution doesn’t matter, it is just a fact that men and women are different: Men and women act differently, think differently, and are physically differentiated by relative physical strength, among many other things. It’s just the way that it is.
I’m not dissing women here, but after thirty-plus years of leftard feminist propaganda, these simple truisms actually need pointing out. Plus, it’s fun to piss off femino-tards. They live in a state of perpetual pissed-offed-ness anyway, so I’m just bringing the underlying psychopathy to the surface.
Men and women are supposed to be complimentary to each other, as women have their areas of superiority as well.
Huckbald – But remember there would not have been Bachs Mozarts or Beethovens without women! Not only to give birth, but to inspire! Who would Da Vinci, Michaelangelo, and Rembrandt have painted if not for women! Who would have mixed the paint? Also, don’t forget Mary Saurat, Madame Currie, Elizabeth Blackwell just to name a few – Artist, Scientist, Doctor respectively. You seem to forget that it was not until the late 19th Century that women could even get a proper education. Hmmmm, why was that I wonder???
No Man example around makes girls feel neglected and insecure. Hence, all the early promiscuity, sexualization and appeasement of girls earlier and earlier today… Rap culture especially where the absence of fathers is higher.
I work in juvvy justice and everything Ann Coulter wrote in “Guilty” about single mothers is true. The overwhelming majority of the junior varsity thugs we deal with come from single (usually never-married) moms. Bonus points if the siblings all have different surnames. If the kid is a gang member, 90% of the time there’s no dad in the picture.
There’s nothing heroic about being an unmarried (not widowed or divorced) mom, except perhaps having enough mercy not to have an abortion. Not every child of a single mother is doomed to be a miscreant and a loser, but even under the best of circumstances there’s still baggage. These Hollywood women are acting like welfare queens, having their show babies with different men and not bothering to marry the fathers. But because Mom can afford an army of nannies, expensive homes, exotic trips, fine schools, designer clothes, and anything the kid could desire, there will still be a hole in that kid’s life. Unfortunately, that kid will have plenty of opportunity and resources to fill that hole with drugs, alcohol, premature sex, and other disasters. These actresses in about 15 years if not sooner will reap what they’ve sown.
Why is it that feminists natter on about “a woman’s way of knowing”, but never acknowledge “a man’s way of knowing”? Why is it that many feminists rail against “testosterone poisoing”, as if it were some environmental pollutant.? You don’t hear about “estrogen poisoning”, do you….
Face it: Nature itself set up the two-sex parent- family as a way for children to achieve optimal nurturing as they grow to become independent. Often that means one parent provides the stick, the other the carrot. Is it totally surprising that children who get all carrot and no stick grow up to be confused, wimpy, promiscuous or hostile? Or utterly ill-equipped to deal with adults and adult life?
Uffe, thoughtful post
“I always thought good parenting would lie within the person, not the gender, sexual orientation”
Very true, but all things being equal, the man and the woman together are especially effective at raising children.
“one could argue that it is a selfish act to get kids in the first place weather you are single or a couple”
Agree with that also.
When I think of a man and woman raising a family, vs. 1 and 1 or just 1, I think of the Chinese symbol of Yin and Yang. I really don’t know the origins of Yin and Yang, or understand it completely, but I really think it applies to parenting.
It was not my intention to suggest that girls don’t need fathers every bit as much as boys do. In fact, the entire opening of the article dealt with children, not merely boys, needing both a mother and a father. The story of the elephants illustrated the importance of fathers in the lives of young males, but, as I recall, there were also some young female pachyderms in the gang. The fact remains that kids are generally raised by single women, not single men, and, so, it is the absence of fathers that causes the greatest harm to the children and to society at large. Fathers who desert their families are scum, but so are single women who wake up one day and decide it would be cool to have children simply because it’s what their friends or some Hollywood tramps are doing.
Regards, Burt
Is it possible…and dare I say it? That women consciously and willfully “Sexualize” themselves in pop culture? That they objectify themselves with the full consent of their own will to feed a vanity problem somewhere? (Take the bizarre trend of Hollywood starlets posing nude in major magazines to reinvigorate their sinking careers..) Is it possible that the woman in playboy knows exactly what she is doing and why she is doing it? Just like Pro-Choice…one things for sure and the lefties are right about…it IS a choice..a woman’s choice to kill a human being, men can aid, fund and encourage like the Devil in your ear…but empowered by current U.S law, women are in control, in the pilot seat, the ultimate trigger pullers. A Feminine Holocaust?…(Hmmmm according to Sally Field there would be no wars if women were in charge….yess I see now) That is one the truth the left is right on. The exceptions are the very young and stupid…thats it, which, by the way, do not make up the majority in any conceivable way.
We don’t need a victim culture..
Just a thought.
As for complicit Child-Men, I agree we need more fathers and “Men” as in the masculine sense of the word, to straighten out these idiots, show them temperance, restraint, honor and respect.
Flamers and Metros need not apply
So, Attmay,
What point are you trying to make? Two guys went to college and you knew another guy?
The APA are a bunch of psychologists. If they were scientists their opinions might matter.
“had history and our gender physiology been different it might have been the other way around”
The mind boggles…
Yes, single women wanting babies as accessories is wrong, but if anyone is stupid enough to become a single mother soley because of what fake people on a movie screen or millionairesses in magazines do is an idiot. However, these women didn’t all become pregnant through sperm banks and implanted embryos. I’d wager most single mothers got that way the old fashioned way. Which brings me to the obligatory comment that men are just as responsible for creating single mothers as the women. Parents, teach your boys to keep it zipped! Personally, I think two parents are better than one regardless of the plumbing. From what I observe of my friends with kids (all married for quite a while before having kids which I think moderately helps with their sanity and judgement) doing it alone would be unthinkable.
)
(LOLA–re: your arguments above about women and great architecture, I just gotta throw out that in those eras women weren’t allowed the education that would’ve enabled them to design that stuff. Had they been, maybe we’d have even more cool stuff to look at
Hukbald — men and women are supposed to compliment each other? Does that include you? If so then work on yourself man, you need some serious help. There is a long list of women in history who have accomplished great things — one in particular might have done a better job, your mom. You ruin your good point with your senseless rant.
This needs to be shouted from the rooftops! Whether it’s gay marriage supporters who want to force little babies into homes without parents of both genders, or the absolutely self-centered mother of octuplets who apparently doesn’t give a flip about what her children really need — the rest of society needs to say ENOUGH! Quit using babies for self-centered purposes.
You can’t make a baby without both a male and female, and you should never force a baby to grow up without both a father and a mother if you have a choice in the matter. SHAME on selfish adults. It’s our responsibility to protect children, not use them to gratify our desires!!
Maura: Women are horrendous drivers. So are men. I just notice that the men tend to do it during the 5 or so rush hours that go with being near a city, and around bar hours, in sports cars, sedans, and pickups. Women do it then and all day in whatever PC name for minivans now and SUV’s, and about 30-40% of them have children in the vehicle.
As for those that talk about nobody actually thinks “hey lets have a trophy baby”: about every 5 years I hear different friends and family complain about how their 14-19 year old daughter and her friends start talking about how awesome it would be to get knocked up; and that it didn’t matter what the boyfriend/sperm-donor or parents think because they ‘know’ they’re prepared and don’t need any help at all. (note: this tune usually changes pretty quick once it actually happens. And sometimes it’s an attempt to trap the boyfriend.) I actually saw this first hand with my own sister and her peers. I also saw it happening with my own peers about halfway through junior year of high school. It’s totally dumb kids’ ‘reasoning’ and rebelliousness that leads to it, but thankfully only a few actually follow through with it. But the point stands that it still does happen.
What usually happens is just negligence. Girl/young-woman whores around and gets knocked up and then is surprised that womyn power alone isn’t enough to keep her previous material quality of life, nor does it change diapers at 2 a.m.
“Young women have become increasingly wacky.”
Heh. Thanks, Old Dude. And how about all those uppity Negroes? The horror, the horror.
“Understand I am not referring to widows and divorced women who have no choice but to soldier on and do their best for the kids.”
Lots of those divorced women chose to be divorced. They took some poor guy for more than half of everything he had, left him with a broken heart and broken dreams, and then start throwing up hurdles in the way of him trying his best with what resources he has left to be a good father. Don’t shed too many tears for those divorced women.
… actually, insurance companies seems to think that women are better drivers …
Technically, the insurance companies know that women get in fewer ACCIDENTS.
But that is not equivalent to driving well.
Also, more men work in jobs that require a lot of driving, which results in more accidents, and of course, the aggressive little risk-taking spastic puds under the age of 25 cause a LOT of accidents.
Men do, however, drive with greater skill and awareness. Sorry, honey, the Ditz and Jiggle doesn’t work from behind the wheel …. You can’t memorize, talk, and feel your way to hand-eye coordination and an innate comfortableness with spatial relationships.
Uffe, really dude, grammar is not optional. If you’re going to make an argument for a point, it would help to write it in complete sentences.
Burt, I saw the same show about the elephants, and thought the analogy was perfect. I live close enough to Chicago to have gone through neighborhoods hundreds of times where fathers abandoned their children in droves. If that’s what Liberals want the world to look like….well, I’d suggest they be forced to spend a month living in those neighborhoods before they are allowed to vote again.
Harley – February 7th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Heh. Thanks, Old Dude. And how about all those uppity Negroes? The horror, the horror.
Harley, I didn’t know you were a racist.
I’m sure every time a Girls Gone Wild commercial comes on, every one of us beams with pride about woman-power and how they’ve come to realize their full potential.
Eric D. Snider – February 7th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
Trann Coulter is ball-ugly; that’s all that matters!
So thought provoking…
I was kicked out of a women’s book club because I once innocently said: “What a tragedy single motherhood is!” The women were furious with me. How dare I accuse a single mother of being in a situation that wasn’t ideal?
“Being a single mother is a choice, not a tragedy!” A book club member told me, while telling me I was no longer welcome in the club. No loss there, really. I wanted to talk about books, they wanted to complain about men.
Yes, women and men have been indoctrinated to believe that single mothers are acceptable parents. They are not. Better to put a child in an orphanage than place them in the care of a single parent. The statistics speak for themselves, and all you have to do is read “Guilty” to get the entire well-researched litany.
Oh brave, brave Ann Coulter, standing firmly against the tide, risking life, limb, and eternal obscurity to declare single mothers bad for America. It’s not like this stuff sells books. I mean, her previous seven books were bestsellers. But, this… THIS is subversive.
Burt, darling, your… article… is adorable. You’ve never met a single mother, or at least never met one worth quoting here, but you DID see this show on Animal Planet one time, and boy, did that prove feminism wrong! Also, ladies are bad at football! Boo, Hollywood! Pure gold.
A few corrections. “Plastic bosoms” are not a “fad.” They’ve been with us for quite a while now. Nor is single motherhood, a social arrangement we humans encounter well before Murphy Brown. It is very odd to date the beginning of what you charmingly call “feminist propaganda” at 1979. Also, referencing “Lord of the Flies” is not generally considered a good way to make the case for male virtue.
Perhaps if you spoke to an actual single mother, you’d find that her decision to conceive without a father was less a feminist statement than a simple _desire to mother a child_ in a world where good fathers are hard to find. Perhaps if you spoke to an actual child from a single parent home, you’d discover that the world is a better place for his having been conceived. Your implicit position — that a child without a father is not a child worth having — requires rather more argument than you’ve given. I realize that you think social science is some crazy lamebrained conspiracy cooked up by feminists and Marxist sociologists, but even your hero, the demure and ladylike Ms. Coulter, would probably find this mode of argumentation embarrassing.
The womans right to vote should be revoked immediately, and all house and senate fems booted. Look no farther than the nitwits from Maine, and Babs Boxer, clearly the dumbest woman on Capitol Hill.
I’ll reexamine my position when Laura Ingram and Ann Coulter run for officel and are seated. In the meantime, please remove these collective nitwits.
Perhaps if you spoke to an actual single mother, you’d find that her decision to conceive without a father was less a feminist statement than a simple _desire to mother a child_ in a world where good fathers are hard to find
So I’m guessing you’re fully behind the single woman who just gave birth to octuplets? You know, the single woman who already had six other children born via in-vitro fertilization. After all, her “desire to mother a child” trumps all other considerations. Right?
Kerry –
You sly dog you. “Your implicit position — that a child without a father is not a child worth having.” You can’t defend your position, so you change it (and then follow up with the requisite insults). No one thinks that any child with one parent is “not worth having” — but, you’re looking at the picture bass-ackwards.
Tell me, is a handicapped child “a child worth having?” Of course he/she is. But, would you deliberately injure a child to serve your own needs?
That’s what women who choose to conceive a child without a father in the picture are effectively doing. They are injuring/cutting off the CHILD’s right to be raised by both of those who created it. And, everything that would come of having that absent parent in the child’s life. Single women who choose to conceive a child KNOW AHEAD OF TIME they are conceiving a child with the handicap of not having a male figure as a fixture in its life. And, I’m sorry, “I have male friends just doesn’t cut it.” Does a single mom’s female friends give it the same nuturing the mom would? Um, no.
Was your father important in your life? Or, did he not really matter given your mother’s love. THINK about this for a second, please. That’s what your saying.
Fact is, the single woman who chooses to conceive a child while single puts her own interests far above the child’s interests. Of course this does not apply to children of divorce/where one parent abandons the child and dies. Tragedies occur and kids by and large have an uncanny knack for turning out ok. And, handicapped kids learn how to play catch, too. And, may indeed turn out to be even MORE accomplished at some things by virtue of their handicap. But, a parent can’t know this in advance. They can only ensure their child has the things most likely to produce success/happiness, etc. – and that is a mother AND a father. Given our technology and our society, ultimately the choice is up to the individual woman. But, deliberately hobbling your child for your own selfish desires is certainly not something that should be CELEBRATED or encouraged.
I teach middle school in Los Angeles. I’m around adolescent boys every day. Burt is right. Boys need dads, desperately.
If there were real “men” out here & not the metrosexulized version maybe there would be less single women. Nothing romantic or enduring for a single woman who truly desires a male partner to have to compromise by committing to a whiny
girly-man or the porn-crazed adolescent who never wants to grow up & be a MAN.
Since this is Big Hollywood, I’ll reference a Gary Cooper or John Wayne type as am antiquated paragon of a “real man” in all their swaggering confident yet humble heroic glory.
There seems to be an assumption that an unmarried mother has chosen that intentionally. The unwed mothers I know aren’t single out of choice. They are single and raising a child alone because the man they got involved with ran off as soon as there was a baby in the picture. Perhaps there wouldn’t be so many fatherless children if the fathers themselves weren’t so eager to cut and run like my brother did when he got his girlfriend pregnant.
@Wendy
You’re absolutely right. I haven’t read Coulter’s book, but I felt like that was one point that wasn’t brought up in the interviews that addressed this subject. I don’t think women who deliberately give birth to babies without a father present are doing the kids any favors– but the fathers who bail on their responsibility need to be held responsible too.
Someone above said it beautifully: THE GOVERNMENT HAS BECOME A ‘SURROGATE FATHER’!! WHO will play FATHER to those octuplets recently born to that nitwit who already had six kids??? “DADDY CALIFORNIA (i.e., taxpayers)??
what does coulter know about parenthood? She doesn’t have any kids.
Kids needs parents who will provide them with tools to survive in the world and character-building qualities. And they don’t just come from a set of male/female parents. There are so many posters on here with their heads in the clouds, it’s not even funny.
==what does coulter know about parenthood? She doesn’t have any kids.==
And she can be moe objective about them, therefore.
==Kids needs parents who will provide them with tools to survive in the world and character-building qualities. And they don’t just come from a set of male/female parents.==
Yes, they do. A man will provide one set of perspectives and the woman will provide another set of perspectives. They may match and they may not, and the child needs to be part of the man-woman metric to see how the real world is. The child cannot get this metric from the same-sex couple. So, the best scenario is the man-woman one.
My wife is an elementary school teacher. It is common to have boys in the class with terrible behavior/learning problems who, you guessed it, come from a single mother household.
If you could go out and damage a child as much as single mothers damage their own, you would be thrown in jail and rightfully so. But somehow we celebrate single motherhood. It is a travesty.
THANK YOU, MAURA FLYNN!
That is all.
>>Which brings me to the obligatory comment that men are just as responsible for creating single mothers as the women.<<
Yeah.
The truth is a man who screws around is being even more irresponsible than a woman. He is conceiving a child under circumstances where he will have no control whatsoever over whether the child even makes it to birth. Even if the child does make it to birth there is no guarantee he will even know about it or be able to be involved in any significant way in the child’s life.
At least a woman who can’t keep it zipped might intend to take responsibility if she gets pregnant, or tell herself she intends that. A man doesn’t have that rationalization. Obviously both parties are rationalizing their butts off when they say that but IMO it’s even more wrong for a man.
==The truth is a man who screws around is being even more irresponsible than a woman.===
Except that a women who let men screw around with them are more irresponsible than you say men are.
== He is conceiving a child…==
Men don’t conceive.
==… under circumstances where he will have no control whatsoever over whether the child even makes it to birth.==
Even though part of what goes into making the baby is his.
== Even if the child does make it to birth there is no guarantee he will even know about it or be able to be involved in any significant way in the child’s life.==
And, yet, the woman has sex with him even though she doesn’t vet him first.
==At least a woman who can’t keep it zipped might intend to take responsibility if she gets pregnant, or tell herself she intends that.==
She might. She doesn’t.
== A man doesn’t have that rationalization.==
Really??? That’s news to me.
== Obviously both parties are rationalizing their butts off when they say that but IMO it’s even more wrong for a man.==
Not really. The woman has the last say-so.
@Chris
Your mom sounds like an exceptional woman and you sound like a good man.
Not all single moms should be generalized as *bad* and there are a lot of women who find themselves in that situation despite trying everything in their power to keep a family together. Sometimes guys just bail– and that’s not okay.
The only single mother issue that bothers me are the women who deliberately conceive a child with no intention of having any kind of male influence in the picture. The Hollywood influence the author is talking about are the women, like Jodie Foster who use artificial insemination to conceive a child on her own. Or women like Sheryl Crow who adopt just so they can experience motherhood. Maybe they have a plan for making sure those kids have father figures, but it’s not out in the open and young women who think their lifestyles are glamorous might try to emulate their example. Most people will have enough sense not to do that– but some will. Just take the mom of the octuplets. I don’t know for sure, but she sure seems like she’s attempting to emulate Angelina Jolie.
"There seems to be an assumption that an unmarried mother has chosen that intentionally. The unwed mothers I know aren't single out of choice. They are single and raising a child alone because the man they got involved with ran off as soon as there was a baby in the picture." -Wendy
Oh come on, Wendy! As a fellow woman you should be ashamed of yourself for denigrating the intelligence of other women- namely assuming that it is the man's fault that the woman couldn't seem to judge if the guy with whom she was shacking up was an a**hole or not. They sure know how to pick 'em! Those guys who ran off are jerks, sure, but I have always wondered why the woman who is the "victim" settled for such a loser. There are good guys out there- but chances are you won't find them at the nearest frat party. Close your legs, ladies, and if you want a good man don't settle for the first idiot that drunkenly compliments your breasts.
I am in agreement with this article. In my own dealings with single mothers, I have yet to see a single happy ending to this story. The kids that I was closest to are either dead, in jail or wound up pregnant themselves. The only children that stood half a chance of success were the ones that had a step-father in the picture that stayed around…
Bingo!!!
Excellent question! I hadn't thought of it in those terms before. Feminism=Lazy Man Syndrome!!! Fucking brilliant, dude!
You forgot to add "motherfuckers"…
[...] Moms Make Lousy Dads [...]
You can take this a bit further. Part of the problem is the misuse of the word "man". Society will call just about anything a "man" these days and it has to be confusing to young women in search of a mate. In a world where metrosexuals are supposedly redefining manhood and where "men" are having babies, it's no wonder women are choosing to go it alone (or with another woman). There's hardly any difference between today's worldly female and the emasculated, effeminate guy that is today's male.
My point was the man can tell himself that, but it isn't true, because should a child result, the very future existence of the child will be outside his control.
I'm not trying to justify anything by either party – mainly trying to make the point to other men who give a hoot about their hypothetical unborn children that in today's world they need to be extra careful.
"My mom's my best friend."
You must be logged in to post a comment.