In researching this month's blog, I found Yahoo Answers, which provides reader responses to various questions. In answer to the question, "Are fathers really needed?" I came upon this response:
"In today's society, they aren't. Sometimes women and children are better off without them (in the case of abuse and instability). Historically the father's role was one of provision (bringing food or money to the table) and protection (from animals, environment and other potential mates).
Modern conveniences and lack of sexual prejudice make it very easy to do without the male component."
What does she mean by "modern conveniences?" Is she talking about welfare? Sex toys? And "lack of sexual prejudice" is code for what? I didn't realize the union of a man and a women was considered prejudicial.
 |
Now, I know that the people that respond to some of these questions are idiots, but this left me speechless. How could she possibly think society has evolved to the point that fathers are no longer needed? Is she 1) some kind of radical feminist who hates men, or is she 2) from a broken home and she hates her father for leaving, or is she 3) a lesbian who thinks women is where it's at? Or all three?
As bad as this example is, why do I think she's not the only woman to think this way?
Last Saturday, my wife and I -- along with some some friends -- went to see a movie called "Courageous." The film, produced by the faith-based Sherwood Studios, features five "male components" who come to realize the importance of being good fathers when one of them suffers the loss of a child in a car accident.
As a way of reaffirming their commitment to being good fathers, they make a pledge to make the right decisions in their marriages, at work and church. The fact that four of them are cops allows us to see the importance of fathers in society through broken marriages, kids who look to gangs for a sense of belonging and by taking responsibility for getting a high school girl pregnant.
I think the movie could have been better without its hard-to-miss religious theme -- non church going types will cringe with every reference to Jesus, and most would agree that this movie could never be shown in our public schools because some liberal group (or even parents, ironically) would cry "separation of church and state."
As you might imagine, the Hollywood critics hated the movie. (Rotten Tomatoes critics gave it a 34%, while audiences (who actually watched the movie) gave it a 91%). It's a very powerful movie and one that should be watched by everyone.
Why is it that a movie which stresses the benefits of a traditional family can't be shown in school, but legislation can be introduced to require the teaching of gay history in schools? It's happening in California, where Democratic Senator Mark Leno of San Francisco said, "This is not teaching sexuality. This is teaching history and Civil Rights, fighting for the great promise of our constitution, that all men and women are created equal and should be treated fairly and equally under the law."
Unless you're a Christian and/or father.
I have great conversations with a co-worker who is always telling me about his son. Specifically, his son's adventures in football, cross country and basketball. Today he was talking about how great it is to be a parent. His son is at the age where he is getting involved in a lot of things, and learning new skills in school and sports. As a parent, he looks forward to spending hours of his weekend watching his son play basketball even though he is in his first year, and Pat never played the game himself.
No question that one of the greatest things about fatherhood was being able to watch your children grow. I can still remember seeing Sean, pitching two-seam fastballs to opposing batters in 90 plus degree summer heat. I'd walk out to the pitcher's mound and ask him how he was doing. Always the same response: "I'm fine." Or when his older brother Matt and I would watch - holding our breath - the latest version of his derby car slide down the track at a regional Cub Scout pine car race. The expectations for success were never so high, even though it REALLY didn't matter in the big scheme of things.
Pride doesn't begin to describe the joy of being a father. Add protective, supportive, encouraging, affectionate, sympathetic and indulgent and you're getting close. Try taking your son or daughter mountain climbing for a week (without cell phones, computers and television )if you haven't ever experienced what I'm talking about.
Of course, not every moment with your children is a thing of paternal pride. My two boys seemed to find particular joy in getting sick at the most embarrassing times. Fortunately for me, both times where with my wife. Once with Matt when he got sick all over the deli case, and another time when Sean waited until we were eating at Estaban's Restaurant before he got sick right on her lap. Even if that restaurant was still open, I don't know if she could show her face today.
 |
My own fatherly pride took a severe blow when I failed to lock the kitchen door which allowed a curious Matt to rocket down the basement stairs while securely fastened to his wheeled walker. Or when Sean cut his finger to the bone, causing some lightheaded-ness on my part. At least that's the reason I gave for going to the wrong hospital as I sped with him to Urgent Care. I will never forget the silent, brave look in his eyes as we looked at each other while the doctor stitched his finger together.
Of course not every child is blessed to have such pleasant memories of their fathers. I was listening to the radio today and heard about a father who was arrested after driving drunk and high on drugs. When the cops stopped his car, which was swerving from lane to lane, they discovered a young child in the back seat.
I don't know what happens to people who treat their children with less regard than a twelve ounce glass of Milwaukee's Best, but I know that something has gone wrong. Far from the moment that a newborn baby emerges into this world and is held for the first time by its parents. My own father, and those of his generation, missed out on what it was like to hold me for the first time, then gently placing me on my mother's stomach while cutting the umbilical chord. That, and going to Burger King to get a couple of cheeseburgers, are what I remember most about our first born's arrival.
So getting back to the reader who responded with "no" to the question of "do we need fathers?". I think most of us (except for the most liberated, I AM WOMAN types) would have to agree that the answer should be a resounding "Yes." For no other reason than the following, which sheds light on some terrible statistics:
Incarceration Rates. Boys who's fathers were absent from the household had double the odds of being incarcerated (Journal of Research on Adolescence).
Suicide. Sixty-three percent of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Bureau of the Census).
Behavioral Disorders. Eight-five percent of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless home (U.S. Center for Disease Control).
High School Dropouts. Seventy-one percent of all high school dropouts come from fatherless home (National Principal's Association Report on the state of high schools).
Educational Attainment. Kids living in single-parent households report lower educational expectations, less parental monitoring of school work, and less overall social supervision than children from intact families (American Sociological Review).
Confused Identities. Boys who grow up in father-absent homes are more likely than those in father-present homes to have trouble establishing appropriate sex roles and gender identity ("Fatherless Children," by Adams, Milner and Schrepf).
Aggression. In another study, researchers of urban elementary school children found "greater levels of aggression in boys from mother-only households than from boys in mother/father households." (Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vaden-Kierman, Ialongo, Pearson and Kellam).
What's so vastly disappointing about these statistics is the repeated attempts by the left to explain why these results exist. According to them, it's not the lack of a father, but income levels, race or a changing workplace. Our government responds by offering women a welfare system that not only doesn't provide a father, but promotes an alternative lifestyle which encourages more fatherless children. It's a self-defeating and self-perpetuating cycle of poverty, low achievement and increased crime. And it's sickening to think that there are race practitioners who blame it on unfairness and inequality.
As parents, we should do everything we can to shut down this debilitating system of abuse. Children need fathers and mothers. Which means marriage must become something of value, something respected and desired again. It's gotten so common for people to back out of commitments (or be afraid to enter them) that single parent households continue to grow.
For the sake of our children -- who risk missing out on basketball games, coloring Easter eggs, camping, fishing, hunting, and graduating from high school and college -- fathers must stand up and be "courageous."
