dlj5

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* The DesertLight Journal Volume 1, Number 5*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* June 13, 2001 This is the first bi-weekly e-zine intended to focus primarily on the issues ofdomestic violence against men and divorce/child custody issues. We welcome news of groups, websites, and people in the men's rights movement worldwide. We encourage new writers and commentary. For all the news all the time, visit our buds http://www.mensactivism.org in the USor http://www.angryharry.com in the UK.__________________________________________"A woman needs a man like a fish needs the river."__________________________________________WEBSITE NEWSThe Vermont Dads Org is only one of many new entries in the Links section at the DLJ website. We've included links for/to writers, an essay section called, "The Heart of the Matter," and much more! Since our official launch on May 30, we've had visitors from all over the world, from the places you'd expect, such as Canada, Australia, and the UK, to places you'd never expect, such as Saudi Arabia, Japan, Sweden, and Greece! So it's really true when we say, "The Sun never sets on our Homies!"Check it out if you haven't been to the website in the past few days. http://www.desertlightjournal.homestead.com/ If your website or org hasn't been includedsend us an e-mail with your URL. We'll be happy to add your info! Also take a look at http://www.REALdads.org Their official launch is Fathers Daystop by and say hello! From Randall Thompson: "This website has not been rolled out to the nation yet. I am a legislative aide with the Michigan House of Representatives and have been blessed with the contacts to have this site unveiled by the national media on or about Father's Day of this year (fluff piece at the end of the newscast). I ask that you become part of something we hope to be truly special!!!"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~SURVEYDr. Hutchison of the University of North Texas is currently conducting a survey on the implications of child support on taxes and hopes to change the tax laws pending the outcome of his survey. Please visit: http://reachme.at/childsupport for a downloadablesurvey. The FAQ section should answer most questions.The survey applies to all non-custodial parents who paid child support during CY 1999 or CY 2000, be they man, woman, divorced, or never married. Please spread the word. This is an important survey and he is looking for participants.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*********FATHER'S DAY EVENTS*********~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ARIZONAby David Hamu Arizona Fathers' Rights is focused on staying positive and active.I thought I would share the spirit and encouragement of what is going on in Arizona. Arizona Fathers' Rights is holding a FATHER'S DAY PICNIC this Father's Day at Tempe Kiwanis Park in Tempe, Arizona. It promises to be a great day for Arizona Fathers. We will be celebrating fatherhood in all of its forms and we will be thinking of our brothers, our brothers' children and the rest of the members of the movement throughout the country and the world.For more info contact, David Hamu> dave_hamu@yahoo.comwww.arizonafathersrights.orgGEORGIA¾The Gwinnett Chapter of FAPT will be having a Father's day picnic June 17th (this coming Sunday!) at Shorty Howell Park in Duluth from 12:00 PM to 4:00 PM. Shorty Howell Park is on the North side of Pleasant Hill Road between Peachtree Industrial Boulevard and Peachtree Parkway (hwy 141). Come meet FAPT members, learn about the organization and have fun!Bring your Kids!Shorty Howell Park has play areas, a duck pond (with ducks) and plenty of room for footballs, Frisbees and other games.Food Supplied !Burgers, hotdogs, chips, sodas, etc... will be served!Just Show Up !No need to RSVP.Want more information?Want to let us know you are coming? (Please do if you can)Contact Mike Yohe at; mikeyohe5@hotmail.com FAPT (Fathers Are Parents Too) MISSOURI¾This Father's Day, the American Coalition for Fathers and Children will be holding our third annual fundraiser at the Missouri Botanical Gardens (www.mobot.org). It is one of the finest botanical gardens in America. Our fundraiser has become the biggest father's day event in St. Louis.DUBLIN,IRELAND--A protest march will take place next Sunday (Fathers' Day). The protesters will gather at Dolphin House East Essex Street in Temple Bar Dublin 2, at 3 pm and proceed to St.Stephen's Green arriving there circa 3.30 pm.The aim of the protest, held on Fathers Day, is to highlight how Irish fathers are being marginalised and discriminated against by the Family Law Court system in Ireland, and to let the many thousands of Irish men, who are living with injustice in isolation, know that they are not alone.The March is being organised under the collective banner of the Parents' Defence Campaign will be attended by members of Gingerbread Ireland, Grand Parents Obliterated, Non-Disposable Daddies Ireland, Portlaoise Men's Group, Positive Parenting Ireland, Tallagh Unmarried Fathers, Parental Equality and others. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~BREAKING THE PINK BARRIER~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Commentary by John KnoutenIs the Masculist movement really slow?It does seem that way, but it moves much faster than the Feminist movement moved in its day. The Men's movement became important, after male bashing became mainstream in the late 60-s, discriminatory laws were passed in early 80-s, and (widespread) legal abuse of men, called "legislative effect" became severe in the 1990-s. Thus, the Masculist movement had only a 10-year experience working with real oppression.Let's compare that to the Feminist movement. Female bashing (connected to demonology) started in the late 1400-s, and reached the peak in 1560-s. Also, the 16-th century saw a very significant legislative effect, which was very discriminatory against women, and lasted up to about 1840. Feminist movement was very weak up to thesecond half of the 18-th century, when it reached the same stage, the Masculist movement had reached by ~1990. By about 1850(?), Feminism grew as strong as Masculism is today.So, to sum up, Masculism starts up at least 10 times faster than Feminism. In my opinion, Masculism does have a future. Some of the reasons for our greater speed may be:1) Male bashing today is far more vicious, and extensive, than female bashing ever was.2) Men are generally more interested in global politics.3) Men are being called patriarchs, which makes it even more difficult for us to bear discrimination.4) Mass communications, primarily the Internet allow both men and women, who like men to express their politically incorrect views, without being rejected by society.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"Redefining Fatherhood, Reinventing Responsibility"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~by Tony ZizzaIt's Father's Day 2001. So why am I thinking about Seinfeld? I'm thinking about the episode when George Constanza, forever frustrated with the course of his life, acts and speaks in the exact opposite way that he should. Then, whatever happens--just happens. Interesting, huh?I am convinced our senators watched this particular episode of Seinfeld several times and decided to apply the "opposite" formula to fathers. It seems fathers are now the focus of backward-ass, feel-good, Orwellian government programs. The government in its wisdom has foisted upon our culture a $747 million dollar program called "responsible fatherhood." Come again? For decades, fathers have been the primary victims of visitation interference, paternity fraud, false allegations of abuse and confiscatory child support orders. However, now "fatherhood" must be made "responsible." Something reeks. Perhaps it's the garbage coming from Democratic Senator Evan Bayh and Republican Senator Pete Domenic, sponsors of the "responsible fatherhood"bill. Give these two imbeciles a little credit for noting the severe downside to ejecting dad from the family many of us have been noting for decades, but give me a big fat break. Is Senator Bayh in his right mind when he says, "We must try to counsel men to wait untilthey are ready to assume the awesome responsibility of bringing a child into the world." George Constanza and opposites right before our eyes! Unreal. It's now men who "bring" children into the world?Obviously these senators cannot grasp fathers are watching fatherhood be redefined just as the nature of responsibility is being reinvented. We're supposed to believe men bring children into the world and have all the cards. We're supposed to believe men as a gender are naturally wired wrong so the government will spend tax dollars making fatherhood responsible once and for all. Then, fatherlessness will end. Oh, really?Fatherlessness is a direct result of many things; men choosing to walk away from a home "welcoming" their fatherhood being a rare occasion. Fatherlessness has resulted from the double-speak inherent in the "responsible fatherhood" bill, a failed welfare state, a decades long assault on masculinity, and quite frankly, a foolish desire to equate a father's worth by his child support obligations. By redefining fatherhood we have reinvented responsibility. But what about fathering? It seems real fathering is happening more in our culture, at least according to the latest Census. The number of U.S. households headed by single fathers with children under 18 increased by over 60 percent during the 1990's. So if more fathers are the primaryparent, why all this garbage about responsible fatherhood? Individuals choose to be and choose not to be responsible parents. Stop the gender nonsense. There is no scientific evidence that states women are better parents than men, and vice versa. Interestingly, talk to noncustodial mothers sometime and they will tell you fathers with primary custody can be just as possessive and alienating as mothers.Responsibility without rights, much like rights without responsibility, is a powder keg waiting to explode. You can't talk to fathers about responsibility when they have no rights. You can't talk to mothers about responsibility when sometimes after agreeing to shared parenting they no longer have any rights. You can't talk about both parents looking out for the best interests of the children when politicians engage in silly semantics about family life in America.Let's make Father's Day 2001 the first father's day in a long time where we acknowledge the value and importance of fatherhood. A father's day where the government doesn't insult men with not being responsible enough. A father's day where we aspire tono longer assault masculinity. A father's day that's inclusive to all who have been ejected from their children's lives.We can do all this without redefining fatherhood, reinventing responsibility.-----------------Zizza is writing a book titled: "The War Against Noncustodial Parents." email: tz777@yahoo.com~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FREE DOWNLOADABLES!!!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~There is a wealth of information available online for free. Some are books, but there are scholarly papers, pamphlets and other things. You can get a real education on the men's rights movement without ever leaving home, or spending a dime. Thanks to Adam Hartney at Mensactivism.com for the following:http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/Library/Amneus/garbage/index.htmlTHE GARBAGE GENERATION (ONLINE) by Daniel Amneushttp://www.mensdefense.org/downloads.htmTHE CASE FOR FATHER CUSTODY (PDF FORMAT) by Daniel AmneusIf you come across other books online, let us know!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FROM THE WASHINGTON POST~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~UNCONVENTIONAL WISDOMBy Richard MorinDaddy's Home. But Which Home?There's a trend in American family life that's giving policymakers fits: the growing number of fathers related by blood or marriage to several sets of children.Currently, about half of the fathers in the United States who do not live with all of their biological children also have family ties to another set of kids -- and one in four have three or more groups of children in their lives, according to a new study by sociologists Wendy D. Manning of Ohio's Bowling Green University, Susan D. Stewart of theUniversity of Richmond and Pamela J. Smock of the University of Michigan.The researchers examined information collected from 649 men with children under 18 who did not live in the father's home. The data were drawn from the National Survey of Families and Households.The problem, the researchers argue, is that most state and federal policymakers still think in terms of one father, one family. "Even child support policies are often based on the premise that men have only one set of children to support," their study concludes, "and some state-level child support policies implicitly favor one set of offspring -- resident versus nonresident -- over another."--------------The referenced paper appears to be:Manning, Wendy D., Stewart, Susan D. and Smock, Pamela. "The Complexityof Fathers' Parenting Responsibilities and Involvement with NonresidentChildren." which can be downloaded from the following web site:http://www.bgsu.edu/organizations/cfdr/framesets/researchframe/research/papers.htmlFull text of the Post article is at:http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43298-2001Jun8.html~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." --- Winston Churchill~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Trudy W. SchuettPublisherhttp://www.desertlightjournal.homestead.com/©2001 TWSchuettThis e-zine may be shared or forwarded provided the entire publication is sent. To subscribe to the DesertLight Journal, send a blank e-mail with "subscribe" in the subject line. Commentary and contributed articles are not necessarily the opinion of the DesertLight Journal. We strive to include all views in the emerging men's rights movement, and therefore cannot be expected to agree with everything.