Dads Against the Divorce Industry

DA*DI is devoted to reinstating the societal valuation of Marriage and the traditional, nuclear American Family, with particular emphasis on the essential role of FATHERS.

DA*DI offers contemporary reports and commentary on culture; its aberrations and its heroes.

Regaining Perspective:
Toward Reinstating Heroism

RECENT NEWSPAPER STORIES, here in the midwest but very much like others throughout the country, continue to reflect the feminist impact on the American culture.

In Nebraska, a young mother piled her 3 boys - including twins - into the family SUV and then intentionally drove them and herself into a lake where all drowned. Predictably, the media fell over itself in an attempt to excuse this multiple homicide-suicide by the mother. Several days of media coverage expounded that this tragic heroine was the victim of an intractible depression. Several stories suggested that her frustration with her marriage / husband were the root of her misadventure.

Meanwhile, in Iowa, a father held his children hostage. In the aftermath, all the kids safely retrieved, the press once again strummed the feminist guitar - praising the children's bravery in the face of their miscreant father's abusive behavior. The question that leapt to mind was, Why in this case did the press not ask; "What has driven this man to this desperate act?" Motivation it seems is not an equal-opportunity excuse.

Frankly, we shouldn't care about motivation in either case. The acts were mutually despicable and insanely selfish on both parent's parts. The father's behavior was only less despicable by degree - his children are still alive.

These opposing stories are pretty small change in comparison with the more egregious centerpieces of our nouveau feminized culture.

Nothing can top the two primary exemplars of unconstitutional feminization: The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and the Family Courts' suspension of due process for fathers (for the latter see Stephen Baskerville's "The Criminalization of Fatherhood"). VAWA is the fin de siecle of radical feminism. It is the legislative equivalent of the Berlin Wall separating men from women by the force of guard tower "harassment" edicts and a pit bull judiciary. And this in the face of unequivocal social science evidence that disproves the junk-science dogma of feminism.

This feminist power play has been stunningly effective in coercing wealth redistribution and fostering male emasculation - no matter how chivalrous his intents.

More remarkably yet, this campaign of vilipendication and criminalization of everything male - from courting behavior to paternal protection - has decimated the American lexicon. In this revulsion of masculinity, appellations like Hero, Honorable, Gentleman, Chivalry and Nobility have become forbidden artifacts of the past. John Wayne, Audie Murphy, and even Patrick Henry are regarded as suspect. And in their place is the effeminized, affable, nerd - mimicking the toonish Elmer Fudd.

Many wonder why the largely male legislatures at the federal and state level continue to support the feminist whim. I sometimes think that this is the revenge of the scrawny, bookish guy at the beach who once got sand kicked in his face by the more muscular types. And now he has real power, on feminist terms.

But what have the feminists wrought? Lets look at some data that expose the real damage done to the history and honor of the men who fathered the daughters who now ostracize them.

U.S. (Male) Casualties in the Major Wars

War Numbers
not mortal
World War I 4,734,991 53,402 63,114 116,516 204,002 320,518
World War II 16,112,566 291,557 113,842 405,399 670,846 1,076,245
Korean War 5,720,000 33,652 3,262 36,914 103,284 140,198
Viet Nam 8,744,000 47,366 10,801 58,167 153,303 211,470
Total 35,311,557 425,977 191,019 616,996 1,131,435 1,748,431
% 100.0 1.2 .5 1.7 3.2 5.0
Rate Per 1000 35,311 Thousands 12.1 5.4 17.5 32.0 49.5

Easy Company raises the flag on Mt. Suribachi. Easy Company had been fighting 4 days with
40% casualties to date.There are six Flag Raisers on the photo. Four in the front line and two in back. The front four are (left to right) Ira Hayes, Franklin Sousley, John Bradley and Harlon Block. The back two are Michael Strank (behind Sousley) and Rene Gagnon (behind Bradley). Strank, Block and Sousley would die shortly afterwards. Bradley, Hayes and Gagnon became national heroes within weeks.
Consider the slap in the face that feminist mythology has visited upon the 35 million men who have served, fought, died and been dismembered in the bloody wars over the past eight decades. Knowing that they had a 1 in 20 chance of being wounded or killed, they still fought valiantly to preserve the freedoms that have enabled this vicious movement's villification of their masculinity..

Mike Strank
b. 1919 Jarabenia,
Czechoslovakia. 1919
d. 1945 Iwo Jima, Japan.
Mike died on March 1, 1945. He was hit by a mortar as he was diagramming a plan in the sand for his boys. Mike is buried in Arlington National Cemetery.
Even today, a male majority of police officers nationwide risk life and limb to "protect and serve". It is almost mind-boggling to find that their risks are even higher in "per 1000" comparisons with that class of men known as "G.I.s" who served in the greatest armed conflicts of the twentieth century.

U.S. (91.2% Male) Police Officer Casualties

Year Officers Serving Officers
Other: N/A Total
1998 738,000 132 0 132 49,151 49,283
% 100.0 <.006 0 <.006 6.7 6.7
Rate Per 1000 738 Thousands <.2 0 <.2 66.6 66.8

Meanwhile, the feminist hysterics have coerced congress to set apart, as a particular victim class, women who may, but most likely will not, suffer from the much-publicized ravages of Domestic Violence. This protected class who were previously defended and protected by men who went to war, or swore to protect as police officers, or by just plain husbands and dads, now bray their mythical misfortune at every opportunity.

It must be noted, at this juncture, that even the vaunted liberal/feminist magazine Mother Jones: "Hitting the Wall" has acknowledged that domestic abuse is perpetrated by both men and women in equal doses: "Women report using violence in their relationships more often than men." Nevertheless, for the sake of the comparison I'll present the fabricated statistics from the Department of Justice.

Domestic Violence Against Females >age 15

Year Female Population Women
Killed - DV
Other: N/A Total DV
incl rape
1998 92,495,442 1,320 0 1,320 773,190 774,510
% 100.0 .14 0 .14 .84 .98
Rate Per 1000 92,495 Thousands .01 0 .01 8.4 8.41

Franklin Sousley
b. Sept. 19, 1925 Hilltop, KY.
d. Mar. 21, 1945 Iwo Jima, Japan.
Franklin was the last flag-raiser to die on Iwo Jima, on March 21 at the age of 19. When word reached his mother that Franklin was dead, "You could hear her screaming clear across the fields at the neighbor's farm."
When you compare the rates at which women are allegedly killed or "assaulted" (which includes yelling, slamming doors, etc.) by the class of "men" who still thought it was their job to protect them, the braying pales in the face of the facts. The class of "women" killed as a result of domestic violence is 1 per 467 (.002) compared to the class of "male G.I.s" killed in wars to preserve and protect their freedom.

In another comparison, the class of "women" killed as the alleged result of unilateral domestic violence is 1 to 20 (.05) versus the class of male "police officers" killed in the line of duty. The comparisons for non-mortal wounds and assaults are 1 to 134,694 (women vs their GI protectors) and 1 to 8 (women vs their policeman protectors).

I can hear the objections already. And I agree that domestic violence is despicable - even when perpetrated equally by male-on-female, female-on-male, female-on-female, or unequally by black-on-white. Nor should a spouse or mate expect to live under the same threats as war and police combatants.

John Bradley in later life . . . "Of the surviving Flag Raisers, only Bradley was successful in putting his life back together after the war." ---From the best-selling "Immortal Images" by Tedd Thomey
John Bradley returned to his home town in the Midwest after the war, prospered as the owner of a family business, and gave generously of his time and money to local causes. He was married for 47 years and had eight children.
The Global Media reported the death of a World War II icon on January 11, 1994 at the age of 70. But his hometown newspaper best captured the essence of Bradley's life after the war:
"John Bradley will be forever memorialized for a few moments action at the top of a remote Pacific mountain. We prefer to remember him for his life. If the famous flag-raising at Iwo Jima symbolized American patriotism and valor, Bradley's quiet, modest nature and philanthropic efforts shine as an example of the best of small town American values."
---Editorial, "The Antigo Daily Journal"
But the purpose of this data comparison is to point to the "abusive violence" men have silently endured for the greatest part of the last century in service to God, country, and family. We have heard the voice of objection raised to protest seemingly unjust or unwarranted wars, but we have never heard the unified voice of protest from men who were asked to defend against tyranny or threats to their women and children. Even in the face of domestic abuse by a spouse, men have resisted asking for protection from outside sources.

It is also remarkable to note that despite the constant drubbing, men have not lived up to the hysterical claims of the radical feminist propaganda. It is axiomatic that people tend to respond to what is expected of them, even when it is evil, if they are told often enough that this is the expectation. This phenomenon is known as the "self-fulfilling-prophecy."

But men have not fulfilled this feminist prophecy, nor have they responded affirmatively to the steady drumbeat of the "deadbeat dad" myth that is pervasive in the culture. In fact, rates of male violence against increasingly shrewish females has diminished.

It is a given that fathers are experiencing constant harassment from Family Courts, mothers who sabotage custody and visitation decrees, and rampant false allegations of molest and abuse. The remarkable outcome is that men who are suffering mightily from the loss of their children and marriages - as a function of mere female ennui - continue to provide financial support for their children at a rate of 75% to 90%. And this in the face of extortionate support awards that are simply masked redistribution schemes, and the vaguaries of the job market.

What is it that drives men to perform heroically and nobly - even in the face of such institutionalized and unjustified provocation? Carl Jung, the early Freudian antagonist, may have hypothesized that it is part of the great cultural unconscious. Secular evolutionists might argue that it is part of the hereditary structure that is geared to preserve the fittest. Christians might argue that it is the influence of the Holy Spirit. Choose your own perspective. Nevertheless, whether it is the influence of the hidden mind, a genetic code, or Divine intervention, men have assumed the preeminent masculine role of procreator, protector, and provider for mate and offspring for thousands of years.

There is, however, a powerful, proven theory in the science of mind. And that is that human and subhuman beings are strongly influenced by schedules of reinforcement and punishment. Contrary to Freud's focus on the predominance of sexual drives, later behaviorists have repeatedly demonstrated the power of both reinforcement schedules and the fact that even food can supplant the sexual impulse. John Bowlby demonstrated that infants crave the warm and nurturant. And Abraham Maslow championed a "third force" in human motivation - that of self-actualization. In this formulation, "deficiency needs" arise out of physiological deprivation and feelings of alienation. Out of this grows concerns for higher human motivations.

So far we have seen the immersion of the culture in rampant sexualism and materialism. And there is little question that at some nearby point those peak experiences will be satiated, if not saturated.

What happens to men after years of punishment for expressing the masculine roles of provider and protector? What happens to men when the endless diminishment of family and fatherhood finally ends in nihilism? What happens to men after years of cultural suppression of appellations such as honor, duty and heroism? What happens to men after years of sexual satiation in lieu of those higher motivations? When defense and protection is needed, will men be there? Will they still respond to some inner instinct for species or cultural preservation? Will women evolve to supplant the male role? Will the fiction of Zena achieve actualization?

The answer to these questions can bode ill or well for the American culture. But we may assume, with some certainty, this much; Zena is what she appears as - fiction; and if we expect men to act nobly and heroically, honorably and protectively, we must begin once again to reinforce those behaviors and motivations. It is not a safe assumption to believe that those practices will simply spring to the fore in the face of a pressing need.

For now, the perceived power of the self-fulfilling prophecy has been diminished by everyday men's stubborn refusal to be typecast as miscreants - with the exception of feminist-pandering politicians. But how much longer we can count on men's residual instincts to resist this force is an open question.

If we want heroes rather than Elmer Fudds, we must let men know that they have our endorsement. Honor, Duty, Nobility, and Protection are all reinforceable male aspirations. As a culture, it's our choice as to what reinforcement schedule we pursue: the negative expectations of the self-fulfilling prophecy; or the positive expectations of higher motivations.

Gerald L. Rowles, Ph.D.
Back to DA*DI's Home

Dads Against the Divorce Industry Dads Against the Divorce Industry