<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fathers not allowed</title>
	<atom:link href="http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/</link>
	<description>Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:55:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: הרהורים של אבא &#187; Blog Archive &#187; שוויון מגדרי או רב תרבותיות?</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-3/#comment-186861</link>
		<dc:creator>הרהורים של אבא &#187; Blog Archive &#187; שוויון מגדרי או רב תרבותיות?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:34:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186861</guid>
		<description>[...] המשובח Crooked Timber (שכבר הבאתי ממנו בעבר) מביא סיפור מעניין [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>[...] המשובח Crooked Timber (שכבר הבאתי ממנו בעבר) מביא סיפור מעניין [...]</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay in California</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-2/#comment-186734</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay in California</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:50:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186734</guid>
		<description>As a American and a Conservative, this whole issue wants to make me laugh.  

Why?  

Well, I was not working when my son was 2-3 so I was the one who took him to his play groups.  Rather then the town being in charge of the play group, it was a local PRIVATE (ie not run by city) organization/mothers club that handled it.  The fact that I was the only father who was a regular in the group made no difference to any of the moms in the group.

This whole mess in the NL is a great example of what happens when you let your government handle something that parents should handle for themselves.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>As a American and a Conservative, this whole issue wants to make me laugh.</p>

	<p>Why?</p>

	<p>Well, I was not working when my son was 2-3 so I was the one who took him to his play groups.  Rather then the town being in charge of the play group, it was a local <span class="caps">PRIVATE </span>(ie not run by city) organization/mothers club that handled it.  The fact that I was the only father who was a regular in the group made no difference to any of the moms in the group.</p>

	<p>This whole mess in the NL is a great example of what happens when you let your government handle something that parents should handle for themselves.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave_D</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-2/#comment-186730</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave_D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:25:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186730</guid>
		<description>Who cares anyway? The one group that we can always discriminate against is men in general and white men in particular. There may be 5 female only fitness centers in town but let one woman want to use the gym that the men go to and now the whole establishment and it&#039;s clientele must accommodate her or the feds will make your life miserable. Why should this be different?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Who cares anyway? The one group that we can always discriminate against is men in general and white men in particular. There may be 5 female only fitness centers in town but let one woman want to use the gym that the men go to and now the whole establishment and it&#8217;s clientele must accommodate her or the feds will make your life miserable. Why should this be different?</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ingrid Robeyns</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-2/#comment-186664</link>
		<dc:creator>Ingrid Robeyns</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Feb 2007 06:57:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186664</guid>
		<description>nur jemal, 

The Dutch statistics make the difference between &quot;western&quot; and &quot;non-western&quot; minorities (the word used in the Netherlands is &#039;allochtonen&#039;, which means something like people from foreign origin). 10% of the population are non-western minorities, of which 5.7% are muslims - but in the large cities, including the one where I live, this is around 10%.
Of these 10%, the two largest ethnic groups are Maroccan and Turkish. But they represent a significant larger share of the poor, low-skilled,  and unemployed (of course, there are also some extremely &#039;succesful&#039; members of ethnic minorities, but they are not the target-groups of the local public policies).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>nur jemal,</p>

	<p>The Dutch statistics make the difference between &#8220;western&#8221; and &#8220;non-western&#8221; minorities (the word used in the Netherlands is &#8216;allochtonen&#8217;, which means something like people from foreign origin). 10% of the population are non-western minorities, of which 5.7% are muslims &#8211; but in the large cities, including the one where I live, this is around 10%.<br />
Of these 10%, the two largest ethnic groups are Maroccan and Turkish. But they represent a significant larger share of the poor, low-skilled,  and unemployed (of course, there are also some extremely &#8216;succesful&#8217; members of ethnic minorities, but they are not the target-groups of the local public policies).</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nur Jemal</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-2/#comment-186652</link>
		<dc:creator>Nur Jemal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Feb 2007 03:18:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186652</guid>
		<description>Oh one more thing, btw-
My husband was the primary caregiver to our 2, then 3 children the entire 2 years we lived abroad in the Gulf (Qatar), while I worked. We are American, muslim converts. The criticism, suspicion, and negative energy we all had to endure from this was unbelievable. Arabic society has deep-seated cultural norms regarding the roles of men and women, and we were defying most of them!
 
I am not a scholar of Islam so please forgive me for any inaccuracies I may communicate regarding this information. Please know they are my inaccuracies, not my religion&#039;s! Ok, so Islamically speaking, a woman is free to work, it&#039;s her choice, but if she does all the money she makes is for her (her own &quot;mad-money&quot; or &quot;stash&quot; so to speak), it should not be used to support the family because that is the man&#039;s primary role. 

Culturally speaking, Arabic culture puts heavy heavy shame on any man that stays home with the kids and only his wife is working. In their minds he is using her, he&#039;s up to no good, etc. There is nothing &quot;virtuous&quot; that he could possibly be doing, especially if you employ a housemaid (which I did, she was my newborn baby&#039;s Nanny!) if you get my drift! This culture absolutely positively cannot see the issue any other way...

My husband  could not go to my son&#039;s school for any reason, even though he was the children&#039;s primary care giver because I was at work. He was under no circumstances allowed to enter the front gate of that school, let alone go inside the school. The principal would call me at work so she wouldn&#039;t have to talk to him on the phone! 

You have to understand that these may be women that have never, ever shown their faces to any man that is not in their immediate family....And now they may be living in this new Western country, with their faces exposed. What an enormous change, let alone having to show their breasts while nursing their baby in a play group.

 That is how extreme this &quot;ethnic minority&#039;s&quot; culture can be....

So I totally know from first-hand experience what it&#039;s like to have a Mr.Mom in an unfriendly environment. 

If the discussion was purely &quot;should men not be included in playgroups&quot;, I would be totally like &quot;of course they should, segregated playgroups are an unfair and ridiculous idea!&quot;... 

But I discerned that is not really what is on the table...It seems clear to me that the purpose of this 1x/week segregated offering of a playgroup was an attempt by your country&#039;s gov&#039;t to assimilate the &quot;ethnic minority&quot; muslim women into the mainstream culture... not simply to offer a playgroup to the general Western public, and oh yeah it&#039;s no men allowed.

Let me know if more clarification is needed.. 
Peace-</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Oh one more thing, btw-<br />
My husband was the primary caregiver to our 2, then 3 children the entire 2 years we lived abroad in the Gulf (Qatar), while I worked. We are American, muslim converts. The criticism, suspicion, and negative energy we all had to endure from this was unbelievable. Arabic society has deep-seated cultural norms regarding the roles of men and women, and we were defying most of them!</p>

	<p>I am not a scholar of Islam so please forgive me for any inaccuracies I may communicate regarding this information. Please know they are my inaccuracies, not my religion&#8217;s! Ok, so Islamically speaking, a woman is free to work, it&#8217;s her choice, but if she does all the money she makes is for her (her own &#8220;mad-money&#8221; or &#8220;stash&#8221; so to speak), it should not be used to support the family because that is the man&#8217;s primary role.</p>

	<p>Culturally speaking, Arabic culture puts heavy heavy shame on any man that stays home with the kids and only his wife is working. In their minds he is using her, he&#8217;s up to no good, etc. There is nothing &#8220;virtuous&#8221; that he could possibly be doing, especially if you employ a housemaid (which I did, she was my newborn baby&#8217;s Nanny!) if you get my drift! This culture absolutely positively cannot see the issue any other way&#8230;</p>

	<p>My husband  could not go to my son&#8217;s school for any reason, even though he was the children&#8217;s primary care giver because I was at work. He was under no circumstances allowed to enter the front gate of that school, let alone go inside the school. The principal would call me at work so she wouldn&#8217;t have to talk to him on the phone!</p>

	<p>You have to understand that these may be women that have never, ever shown their faces to any man that is not in their immediate family&#8230;.And now they may be living in this new Western country, with their faces exposed. What an enormous change, let alone having to show their breasts while nursing their baby in a play group.</p>

	<p>That is how extreme this &#8220;ethnic minority&#8217;s&#8221; culture can be&#8230;.</p>

	<p>So I totally know from first-hand experience what it&#8217;s like to have a Mr.Mom in an unfriendly environment.</p>

	<p>If the discussion was purely &#8220;should men not be included in playgroups&#8221;, I would be totally like &#8220;of course they should, segregated playgroups are an unfair and ridiculous idea!&#8221;&#8230;</p>

	<p>But I discerned that is not really what is on the table&#8230;It seems clear to me that the purpose of this 1x/week segregated offering of a playgroup was an attempt by your country&#8217;s gov&#8217;t to assimilate the &#8220;ethnic minority&#8221; muslim women into the mainstream culture&#8230; not simply to offer a playgroup to the general Western public, and oh yeah it&#8217;s no men allowed.</p>

	<p>Let me know if more clarification is needed..<br />
Peace-</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nur Jemal</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-2/#comment-186651</link>
		<dc:creator>Nur Jemal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Feb 2007 02:50:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186651</guid>
		<description>Ok, alot is going through my mind after reading the original post and following comments.

1. What is the % of the population on social services in this country that is muslim? It must be a pretty high percentage for the gov&#039;t to think that doing this would be beneficial!
...My conclusion is that the Social Serivces in that country is having these segreated play groups SPECIFICALLY to TARGET the muslim/&quot;ethnic minority&quot; population....not simply to &quot;incorporate them&quot; into the playgroups....
What ethnicity are these muslims? It sounds very much to me like they are from Arabic culture....

2.If in fact the Gov&#039;t there can succeed in actually getting these women to attend the playgroups it will be a hudge milestone. Typically in these countries where they are from, the idea of even reading a book to your child is totally foreign; it simply isn&#039;t done. There is no such thing as playgroups in traditional cultures in places like the gulf; I imagine that North Africa isn&#039;t much different, with the possible exception of Egypt... 

3.I am sure that this country wants to try and assimilate these groups into their society, but it has to be done step-by-step, slowly introducing them to the cultural norms. The void between their culture and the Western state of mind regarding so many facets of life is hudge; Kudos to the Gov&#039;t there for the bold move of trying to help these women make the transition. If they can change the women, they can change the entire family units...

4. It seems that most posters here really have no idea what these immigrant muslim families&#039; values are like. Unless you really have a grasp of what Arabic and Muslim culture truly is, you have no business commenting on the topic.

5.Many of the  comments are, sadly, racist and Western/Imperialistically-tainted versions of Feminism! There are many many many versions of Feminism...YOUR REALITY is not the only one that is CORRECT! 
Peace-</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Ok, alot is going through my mind after reading the original post and following comments.</p>

	<p>1. What is the % of the population on social services in this country that is muslim? It must be a pretty high percentage for the gov&#8217;t to think that doing this would be beneficial!<br />
&#8230;My conclusion is that the Social Serivces in that country is having these segreated play groups <span class="caps">SPECIFICALLY</span> to <span class="caps">TARGET</span> the muslim/&#8221;ethnic minority&#8221; population&#8230;.not simply to &#8220;incorporate them&#8221; into the playgroups&#8230;.<br />
What ethnicity are these muslims? It sounds very much to me like they are from Arabic culture&#8230;.</p>

	<p>2.If in fact the Gov&#8217;t there can succeed in actually getting these women to attend the playgroups it will be a hudge milestone. Typically in these countries where they are from, the idea of even reading a book to your child is totally foreign; it simply isn&#8217;t done. There is no such thing as playgroups in traditional cultures in places like the gulf; I imagine that North Africa isn&#8217;t much different, with the possible exception of Egypt&#8230;</p>

	<p>3.I am sure that this country wants to try and assimilate these groups into their society, but it has to be done step-by-step, slowly introducing them to the cultural norms. The void between their culture and the Western state of mind regarding so many facets of life is hudge; Kudos to the Gov&#8217;t there for the bold move of trying to help these women make the transition. If they can change the women, they can change the entire family units&#8230;</p>

	<p>4. It seems that most posters here really have no idea what these immigrant muslim families&#8217; values are like. Unless you really have a grasp of what Arabic and Muslim culture truly is, you have no business commenting on the topic.</p>

	<p>5.Many of the  comments are, sadly, racist and Western/Imperialistically-tainted versions of Feminism! There are many many many versions of Feminism&#8230;YOUR <span class="caps">REALITY</span> is not the only one that is <span class="caps">CORRECT</span>!<br />
Peace-</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Moz</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-2/#comment-186645</link>
		<dc:creator>Moz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Feb 2007 00:55:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186645</guid>
		<description>How about an utilitarian/economic analysis: the benefit of the policy is that the children at single-parent-sex playgroups grow up better integrated and are less likely to become criminals as a result (feel free to read &quot;socially maladjusted citizens&quot; if that makes you happier). The cost is that a different group that is already severely discriminated against has their discrimination reinforced. The question is: does the benefit outweigh the cost?

To me, men-as-primary-caregivers is something we want to encourage, and the discrimination they face is substantial. There are, however, very few of them (this is part of the problem), and they are not very visible (another part of the problem).

Unfortunately there seem to be a lot of sexist immigrants, which means that even a minor benefit to society on a per-head basis outweighs quite a lot of cost per head to the men as primary caregivers group. 

I expect that feminists who are mostly concerned with women will favour the women-only preschool, while equalitarian feminists will favour integration. But both sorts will hopefully be open to argument. Anyone not counts as a bigot in my book (try looking up what the word means if you find that offensive).

No, I don&#039;t have an answer. I&#039;m someone who intends never to have children and can&#039;t really &quot;put myself in the shoes&quot; of someone who does. Sorry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>How about an utilitarian/economic analysis: the benefit of the policy is that the children at single-parent-sex playgroups grow up better integrated and are less likely to become criminals as a result (feel free to read &#8220;socially maladjusted citizens&#8221; if that makes you happier). The cost is that a different group that is already severely discriminated against has their discrimination reinforced. The question is: does the benefit outweigh the cost?</p>

	<p>To me, men-as-primary-caregivers is something we want to encourage, and the discrimination they face is substantial. There are, however, very few of them (this is part of the problem), and they are not very visible (another part of the problem).</p>

	<p>Unfortunately there seem to be a lot of sexist immigrants, which means that even a minor benefit to society on a per-head basis outweighs quite a lot of cost per head to the men as primary caregivers group.</p>

	<p>I expect that feminists who are mostly concerned with women will favour the women-only preschool, while equalitarian feminists will favour integration. But both sorts will hopefully be open to argument. Anyone not counts as a bigot in my book (try looking up what the word means if you find that offensive).</p>

	<p>No, I don&#8217;t have an answer. I&#8217;m someone who intends never to have children and can&#8217;t really &#8220;put myself in the shoes&#8221; of someone who does. Sorry.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-2/#comment-186643</link>
		<dc:creator>Fred</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Feb 2007 00:28:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186643</guid>
		<description>Maybe this has been mentioned elsewhere, but there are clearly two different aims being discussed here -- the primary purposes of child play groups, which are to benefit (in various ways) children and parents, help parents develop parenting skills, help children learn to socialize, etc. -- and the rather separate goal of socializing otherwise isolated women from sexually segregated cultures.  Why is it necessary to use the play groups to accomplish the second goal?  If this is the aim, let it be confronted directly, by developing or supporting women&#039;s groups which such women could attend and perhaps benefit from.  While children&#039;s play groups might be used to accomplish this laudable goal vis-a-vis the socially isolated women, these groups have a more primary purpose, which is to serve the children and their parents.  They should not be coopted as opportunistic vehicles for other purposes, however desirable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Maybe this has been mentioned elsewhere, but there are clearly two different aims being discussed here&#8212;the primary purposes of child play groups, which are to benefit (in various ways) children and parents, help parents develop parenting skills, help children learn to socialize, etc.&#8212;and the rather separate goal of socializing otherwise isolated women from sexually segregated cultures.  Why is it necessary to use the play groups to accomplish the second goal?  If this is the aim, let it be confronted directly, by developing or supporting women&#8217;s groups which such women could attend and perhaps benefit from.  While children&#8217;s play groups might be used to accomplish this laudable goal vis-a-vis the socially isolated women, these groups have a more primary purpose, which is to serve the children and their parents.  They should not be coopted as opportunistic vehicles for other purposes, however desirable.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JimS</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-2/#comment-186639</link>
		<dc:creator>JimS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Feb 2007 23:15:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186639</guid>
		<description>I recall an old saying--&quot;your right to punch me in the nose ends where my nose begins.&quot;  In this context, a religious group&#039;s right to practice their religion in a public setting ends (or should end) where my right to practice my beliefs ends.  In this case, the children of rational and reasonable people may be deprived of opportunity so others can impose their religious practices.  People who expect religious toleration have to understand that they must give as well as receive this tolerance.  If they can&#039;t do so, they aren&#039;t ready for living in western society.  This isn&#039;t limited to Muslims, but applies to fundamentalists of all stripes.  Rational thought does not have to bend to accommodate the irrational.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I recall an old saying&#8212;&#8221;your right to punch me in the nose ends where my nose begins.&#8221;  In this context, a religious group&#8217;s right to practice their religion in a public setting ends (or should end) where my right to practice my beliefs ends.  In this case, the children of rational and reasonable people may be deprived of opportunity so others can impose their religious practices.  People who expect religious toleration have to understand that they must give as well as receive this tolerance.  If they can&#8217;t do so, they aren&#8217;t ready for living in western society.  This isn&#8217;t limited to Muslims, but applies to fundamentalists of all stripes.  Rational thought does not have to bend to accommodate the irrational.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gussie</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-2/#comment-186638</link>
		<dc:creator>gussie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Feb 2007 22:41:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186638</guid>
		<description>The problem isn&#039;t the existence of mother-only playgroups, any more than the problem is a few white-only or fundamentalist-only playgroups (publicly funded, that is). The problem is the public discrimination against certain types of families: single-father, gay male couples, and straight couples in which primarily the father engages in this sort of childcare. 

We simply can&#039;t support public initiatives which cater to religious beliefs that exclude certain groups. It&#039;s a pity, because these mother-only playgroups might do a great deal of good: but they&#039;re unacceptable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>The problem isn&#8217;t the existence of mother-only playgroups, any more than the problem is a few white-only or fundamentalist-only playgroups (publicly funded, that is). The problem is the public discrimination against certain types of families: single-father, gay male couples, and straight couples in which primarily the father engages in this sort of childcare.</p>

	<p>We simply can&#8217;t support public initiatives which cater to religious beliefs that exclude certain groups. It&#8217;s a pity, because these mother-only playgroups might do a great deal of good: but they&#8217;re unacceptable.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christopher Fahey</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-2/#comment-186630</link>
		<dc:creator>Christopher Fahey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Feb 2007 21:57:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186630</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t see the dilemma. It&#039;s wrong to discriminate based on sex. Minorities who are averse to mixed-sex gatherings must either change their beleifs or live in isolation of mainstream culture. If anything, this policy makes the taboo on mixed-sex gatherings into law. Why not go all the way and forbid women from driving cars or having jobs in order to accommodate gender-sensitive cultural taboos? Good greif, where is your common sense?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I don&#8217;t see the dilemma. It&#8217;s wrong to discriminate based on sex. Minorities who are averse to mixed-sex gatherings must either change their beleifs or live in isolation of mainstream culture. If anything, this policy makes the taboo on mixed-sex gatherings into law. Why not go all the way and forbid women from driving cars or having jobs in order to accommodate gender-sensitive cultural taboos? Good greif, where is your common sense?</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pat</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-2/#comment-186629</link>
		<dc:creator>Pat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Feb 2007 21:44:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186629</guid>
		<description>Let me try to take this--somewhat--out of the abstract.

Other than the fact that this is in the Netherlands, not the US, I&#039;ve faced it.  14.5 years ago, after we had our first child, I--the father--stayed home with the kids, and stopped being a full-time employee.  Naturally, as our sons got older, we wanted to get them out and have the opportunity to play with other kids (I was also eager to have some more contact with adult human beings--something I&#039;ve heard mothers of small kids express in the same terms).  I happen to have a gender neutral first name, and in some email contacts, people (reasonably) assumed I was female. As time went on, I made a point of making it clear that I wasn&#039;t....

I showed up to gatherings in parks and was almost always the only male present. Eventually, I made contact with a couple other fathers in the same situation.  We compared notes.

We&#039;re the smaller minority (still).  We experience all kinds of hostility and suspicion (try being a male alone with a shrieking two year old who is furious about something and is screaming for his mommy, walking out of a mall.  No one bats an eye at a mother; security visits with a father, after several people give you the evil eye...).  One of us had a playgroup simply up and move.  They changed place, day, and didn&#039;t even tell him.  They didn&#039;t want a man there.  From my own experience and observation, they guy was pretty mild and inoffensive, and vociferously feminist.  Others got invited out of groups they approached.  I simply got... ignored.  Efforts to simply have the most superficial social contact, focused on the kids, were snubbed.

The real losers were the kids.  We adults were offended, but we had other contacts and friends; the kids were being excluded--because their parent who was around by day was male.

Eventually, we organized our own playgroup and met regularly.  But we got all kinds of strange for that, too.  People asking if we were all giving mom the day off (growl).  Women who were at a park with their kids packing up and leaving.  One who told us she thought it was incredibly rude and hostile of us to have a group of men-only as a playgroup (as if we were the ones who&#039;d been excluding).

I&#039;ve sympathy for the problem that is being addressed.  It&#039;s not bogus.  But the truth is that if women sincerely want to encourage the idea that parents are equal and ought to be equally able to serve all needs (other than birthing and nursing...), then they need to be willing to support that--actively, and in the vast majority of cases and situations.

There&#039;s a really bitter irony when you hear women bitch about their husbands not carrying their share, and they turn around and refuse to include men who are carrying the same load that they are in their social circle, and exclude the kids of those men.  Message sent.

I&#039;m perfectly fine with there being places where the genders can be apart.  But they should be relatively rare and distinct. 

Note that in one case, kids and adults are being actively excluded and in the other, adults are  making a choice, rooted in their faith (a choice) to exclude themselves.  One&#039;s a choice that respects the individuals, one&#039;s not.

Again, I have no problem with there being some--though I&#039;d want them to be a distinct minority--groups that are single gender parent groups.  But it&#039;s not my preference, and if any of the men involved in the group I participated in had had the option, we&#039;d have been in mixed groups. We were all interested in our kids growing up with the clear idea that it was ok for it to be mommy OR daddy that did various things.  Sadly, we had to gather from all over San Diego County to provide a group for men raising kids, because the women (many of them, I&#039;m certain, who saw themselves as feminist) didn&#039;t apparently want that.  Not in practice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Let me try to take this&#8212;somewhat&#8212;out of the abstract.</p>

	<p>Other than the fact that this is in the Netherlands, not the US, I&#8217;ve faced it.  14.5 years ago, after we had our first child, I&#8212;the father&#8212;stayed home with the kids, and stopped being a full-time employee.  Naturally, as our sons got older, we wanted to get them out and have the opportunity to play with other kids (I was also eager to have some more contact with adult human beings&#8212;something I&#8217;ve heard mothers of small kids express in the same terms).  I happen to have a gender neutral first name, and in some email contacts, people (reasonably) assumed I was female. As time went on, I made a point of making it clear that I wasn&#8217;t&#8230;.</p>

	<p>I showed up to gatherings in parks and was almost always the only male present. Eventually, I made contact with a couple other fathers in the same situation.  We compared notes.</p>

	<p>We&#8217;re the smaller minority (still).  We experience all kinds of hostility and suspicion (try being a male alone with a shrieking two year old who is furious about something and is screaming for his mommy, walking out of a mall.  No one bats an eye at a mother; security visits with a father, after several people give you the evil eye&#8230;).  One of us had a playgroup simply up and move.  They changed place, day, and didn&#8217;t even tell him.  They didn&#8217;t want a man there.  From my own experience and observation, they guy was pretty mild and inoffensive, and vociferously feminist.  Others got invited out of groups they approached.  I simply got&#8230; ignored.  Efforts to simply have the most superficial social contact, focused on the kids, were snubbed.</p>

	<p>The real losers were the kids.  We adults were offended, but we had other contacts and friends; the kids were being excluded&#8212;because their parent who was around by day was male.</p>

	<p>Eventually, we organized our own playgroup and met regularly.  But we got all kinds of strange for that, too.  People asking if we were all giving mom the day off (growl).  Women who were at a park with their kids packing up and leaving.  One who told us she thought it was incredibly rude and hostile of us to have a group of men-only as a playgroup (as if we were the ones who&#8217;d been excluding).</p>

	<p>I&#8217;ve sympathy for the problem that is being addressed.  It&#8217;s not bogus.  But the truth is that if women sincerely want to encourage the idea that parents are equal and ought to be equally able to serve all needs (other than birthing and nursing&#8230;), then they need to be willing to support that&#8212;actively, and in the vast majority of cases and situations.</p>

	<p>There&#8217;s a really bitter irony when you hear women bitch about their husbands not carrying their share, and they turn around and refuse to include men who are carrying the same load that they are in their social circle, and exclude the kids of those men.  Message sent.</p>

	<p>I&#8217;m perfectly fine with there being places where the genders can be apart.  But they should be relatively rare and distinct.</p>

	<p>Note that in one case, kids and adults are being actively excluded and in the other, adults are  making a choice, rooted in their faith (a choice) to exclude themselves.  One&#8217;s a choice that respects the individuals, one&#8217;s not.</p>

	<p>Again, I have no problem with there being some&#8212;though I&#8217;d want them to be a distinct minority&#8212;groups that are single gender parent groups.  But it&#8217;s not my preference, and if any of the men involved in the group I participated in had had the option, we&#8217;d have been in mixed groups. We were all interested in our kids growing up with the clear idea that it was ok for it to be mommy OR daddy that did various things.  Sadly, we had to gather from all over San Diego County to provide a group for men raising kids, because the women (many of them, I&#8217;m certain, who saw themselves as feminist) didn&#8217;t apparently want that.  Not in practice.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-2/#comment-186628</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Feb 2007 21:36:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186628</guid>
		<description>As a male single parent of now grown children, I often encountered prejudice the effect of which was to reduce the options available to my children.  It made me mad then and it makes me angry now, even for something as remote as European play groups.  The answer to how this should be addressed is pretty much the same as that given when a traditional male activity excludes women - get over it guys and make room.  It is right in both places.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>As a male single parent of now grown children, I often encountered prejudice the effect of which was to reduce the options available to my children.  It made me mad then and it makes me angry now, even for something as remote as European play groups.  The answer to how this should be addressed is pretty much the same as that given when a traditional male activity excludes women &#8211; get over it guys and make room.  It is right in both places.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: magistra</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-2/#comment-186627</link>
		<dc:creator>magistra</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Feb 2007 21:20:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186627</guid>
		<description>To all the angry fathers out there. Is the problem primarily the possible existence of a few mother-only playgroups or is it more that supposedly mixed-sex playgroups are in fact largely dominated by mothers and perhaps not very welcoming to fathers? If so, are there practical ways that they come be more welcoming to fathers? How important to you is the principle of having no single-sex playgroups as opposed to the practice of having the vast majority of playgroups more welcoming to men?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>To all the angry fathers out there. Is the problem primarily the possible existence of a few mother-only playgroups or is it more that supposedly mixed-sex playgroups are in fact largely dominated by mothers and perhaps not very welcoming to fathers? If so, are there practical ways that they come be more welcoming to fathers? How important to you is the principle of having no single-sex playgroups as opposed to the practice of having the vast majority of playgroups more welcoming to men?</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Natan</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/comment-page-2/#comment-186626</link>
		<dc:creator>Natan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Feb 2007 20:58:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2007/02/07/fathers-not-allowed/#comment-186626</guid>
		<description>I would not allow my daughter to attend a playgroup where fathers are excluded.  It&#039;s bad enough that the media portrays fathers as incompetent parents who don&#039;t understand children -- there&#039;s no need to reinforce that by excluding fathers who want to parent their own children.

This is akin to when my daughter and I are out and women I know say, &quot;Oh, are you babysitting today?&quot;  No, I am damn well not babysitting.  This is my daughter, and I am her father, and I do not babysit my own child.  

The idea that we should reinforce the prejudice that fathers are not equal parents because someone has that prejudice is ridiculous!  Why not exclude blacks from playing because someone is from 1980s South Africa?  Why not exclude people of one religion because someone else might take offense?

It&#039;s just reinforcing prejudice, and I wouldn&#039;t participate in that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I would not allow my daughter to attend a playgroup where fathers are excluded.  It&#8217;s bad enough that the media portrays fathers as incompetent parents who don&#8217;t understand children&#8212;there&#8217;s no need to reinforce that by excluding fathers who want to parent their own children.</p>

	<p>This is akin to when my daughter and I are out and women I know say, &#8220;Oh, are you babysitting today?&#8221;  No, I am damn well not babysitting.  This is my daughter, and I am her father, and I do not babysit my own child.</p>

	<p>The idea that we should reinforce the prejudice that fathers are not equal parents because someone has that prejudice is ridiculous!  Why not exclude blacks from playing because someone is from 1980s South Africa?  Why not exclude people of one religion because someone else might take offense?</p>

	<p>It&#8217;s just reinforcing prejudice, and I wouldn&#8217;t participate in that.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
