What a "brave new world" we live in- one in which we have on display millions of households (I will not use the word "family" to describe this phenomenon) in which children have no father present, only a single mother. In the past, this condition was an aberration and not to be envied as single mothers of the past were often widows. Divorced women fared worse than widows, and were often ostracized from polite society, along with finding it much more difficult to support their children alone. However, now some, as proudly displayed by women of the Hollywood left, view fathers, and men in general as being more or less "vestigial"- necessary as "sperm donors" or perhaps for sexual entertainment but little else. Granted, there are situations such as when there is abuse in the home, or a parent is widowed, when single parentship is necessary and preferable. But in most situations children are thrust into single-parent homes due to the fact that either Mom bought the feminist lie that "you don't need a man" to have a child, or that Mom and Dad simply don't try to get along and work together in their marriage, and it's the children who suffer.
I look upon my own upbringing as evidence that men are necessary as fathers- men who take an active, vital role in the upbringing of their children, regardless of the children's gender. Daughters need their fathers as much as do sons. (One needs only to investigate the number of teen pregnancies among daughters of single mothers, and the number of these girls who indulge in promiscuous sex and end up in abusive relationships. These girls are looking, often in futility, for a father figure.)
My father had an integral role in defining many aspects of my personality and in setting boundaries and providing guidance not only in moral issues but on issues of achievement, hard work and even political thought. I was fortunate in having a father I could admire and respect (though I realize not all fathers are admirable nor respectable.) I was fortunate in having a positive relationship with my father that remains close to this day- he is my mentor and confidant. This was only achieved because- surprise, surprise, my grandparents insisted that he become an honorable man. He learned values that almost sound foreign today- hard work, responsibility for one's self and one's family, and the importance of a man supporting his family not only financially but also in matters of educating children and giving them boundaries and direction.
Interestingly enough my father was a visionary for his time. Being brought up in a rural, isolated community and also being a staunch Conservative one would believe he would, like many other fathers in that time and place, coddle their daughters and groom them to be dependent upon a man. In stark contrast to the way many of his contemporaries believed, he saw the example my grandmother taught him on the folly of attempting to keep girls ignorant and disempowered. My grandmother was beaten for going to school. (this was in the 1920's) She sneaked off and despite beatings and extreme duress, and displeasure from her father, somehow, made it through the eighth grade- and was an exemplary student. Her father believed that "barefoot, pregnant, and behind the stove"was the place for women. She believed, in contrast, that women should be empowered and should hold their own as citizens- a belief my father shared with me and my sisters. This belief is not to be confused with "man-bashing" but is an affirmation that women are equal to, not better than, men. My father required much of all of us- academic achievement was paramount, but just the beginning. He insisted we either go to college or learn a trade so that we could be empowered to be productive citizens in our own right, whether we chose marriage and family for ourselves or not. At (or in my case, before, at age 15, of my own free will) age 16 we were required to seek and hold down gainful employment and pay for our own luxuries such as cars and their related expenses and trendy clothing. We were required to bring home any boys we proposed to date and they were duly grilled and approved or disapproved- and if Dad disapproved, you didn't date the boy. This was in a time and place in which girls were not encouraged toward academic achievement or actively recruited for most careers. A time and place in which many of our contemporaries were becoming pregnant or dependent upon drugs- where girls were learning the hard way that some boys didn't have the honor to back up the consequences of their actions.
Though my father was adamant in insisting we conduct our lives in an honorable fashion, the prevailing culture did not insist that of others. The girls who had children outside of marriage often became Welfare dependents- the "sperm donors" of said children (this was before DNA testing and vigorous efforts to find "deadbeat dads") running off scot free to donate even more sperm to willing, ignorant females who either didn't have fathers in their lives or had fathers who did not demand high standards from them. It's not all a question of the girls being at fault- it takes two to tango as the saying goes- but the children of these liaisons became mostly the responsibility of the girls- and of the taxpayer's dole. This is where the sad part comes in. For years American taxpayers have subsidized the notion of the "vestigial male," an offshoot of the feminist notion that fathers don't matter. Why should these guys take financial (at the very least) responsibility for children they might (if they're lucky) get to see two weekends a month? More importantly, when popular culture dictates that guys can just go around spreading sperm without discretion, why should they bother with some girl's kids- a girl they may have done the horizontal mambo with once or twice but who they don't really know or love?
How many boys are taught to take responsibility for their actions? How many know that being a father entails so very much more than the sexual act? Have boys learned that they can eschew their responsibilities- and that they don't have to be honorable men?
Our government has done much to erode at the traditional family- for one small instance the "marriage tax" in which married couples pay tax at a higher rate than singles. Since many mothers (myself included) have to work outside the home- a two income family is more often a necessity rather than a luxury- this is an assault on the family pure and simple. Subsidizing the production of illegitmate children in the form of Welfare is another. Fortunately many states are now requiring fathers be identified and that they pay appropriate support before providing Welfare benefits- but the damage, three generations' worth, has been done and will take decades to repair, if ever.
Many wives and mothers work outside the home and provide much needed additional income but how many men take a role in their household outside of the financial one? Have men believed the notorious "Enjoli" cologne commercial of the 1970's in which "I can bring home the bacon, fry it up in the pan, but I'll never let him forget he's a man" and taken it one step further to become not providers and role models but in effect leeches who (at best) simply bring home one paycheck and do nothing else- while the wife not only works outside the home but comes home and then does all the domestic work besides? Is this the case for vestigial men- have feminists succeeded in disempowering men by the notion that "women can do it all" and therefore don't need men? I'd have to agree no woman needs to support an able bodied man or should abide a leech but how did some men come to believe that all they are good for is leeching?
Where have we lost the notion of fathers being the head of the family- the one who is the primary financial provider, the one who sets the tone and provides moral guidance and work ethic? While I don't believe we should go back to the "barefoot, pregnant and behind the stove" female servitude of old, I don't believe men are vestigial by any means. My mother worked outside the home also- and when my parents made the decision that she needed to do so my father took upon himself some of the domestic responsibility such as cooking, some house cleaning and washing his own laundry, rather than my mother working outside the home and having to do all the domestic chores on her own in addition to holding an outside job. And before you get the notion that he's a "pansy" or "whipped" he can still pull an engine out of a car faster than any other automotive technician I know, and has been known to carry transaxles (front-wheel drive transmission/axle assembly for the automotive-lingo-impaired- a big, heavy piece) up a flight of stairs. And the only time I know of he ever wore pink underwear was when he was learning how to do laundry and didn't know you have to separate the red T-shirts from the whitey tighties. We still laugh about that. He does a fine job with his own laundry these days, and can cook a mean lemon-pepper catfish too.
The "vestigial" male is a product of feminist ideas pervading mainstream culture. We lose an integral part of our humanity when males are trivialized. Men lose their sense of purpose and they lose their moral bearings when they are regarded in this manner. Why do we see so many young males engaging in violence and crime, and violent acts perpetrated toward women? Perhaps they feel a need to justify themselves- to acknowledge their "superiority" in bullying since many feel as if they have no purpose. This doesn't absolve them from accountability by any means. We must acknowledge that men are called to be honorable- to work, to be involved with their children, to be in partnership with their wives. We must acknowledge that the feminist myth of the vestigial male is false, damaging and dangerous.
Elysian Hunter
4-19-01
www.oocities.org/elysianhunter
Please feel free to visit my website for more Conservative commentary and irreverent humor.