With Father’s Day upon us, the time has come to address as a nation what Heather Mac Donald noted earlier this year is “the greatest social catastrophe of our time”: fatherlessness. Fatherlessness is the No. 1 cause of nearly all social ills we face. We can’t afford to ignore it any longer.
To be clear, father absence is the more accurate term, since fatherlessness implies that men have become “deadbeat dads” — nothing could be further from the truth. Sure, this faction exists, as do “deadbeat moms.” But the two most significant threats to a father’s presence in the home are divorce and out-of-wedlock births.
It’s the breakdown of marriage, in other words, or the collapse of the family, that results in father-absent homes. Whether you feel its pain directly or not, it affects you. “Families are the building blocks of civilization,” writes Genevieve Wood at the Daily Signal. “They are personal relationships, but they greatly shape and serve the public good. Family breakdown harms society as a whole.”
Indeed it does. And how, exactly, did the family fall apart? When we stopped valuing men and marriage.
There was a time, believe it or not, when marriage was highly valued. Ergo, the majority of Americans married. They even looked forward to it! It was an honorable mark of adulthood to leave one’s family of origin and build a family of one’s own.
Then came feminism. “And with it,” notes Dennis Prager in his “Fireside Chat” on marriage and children vs. career, “the notion that ‘a woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle.'”
This mantra was glamorized (though not coined) by Gloria Steinem in the 1970s and was quickly inculcated both in Prager’s generation and those that followed. Prager rightly defines America’s new narrative, which is directed specifically to women: “You don’t need a man; you need a career. Then you’ll be happy.”
Since this narrative first took hold, America has undergone a sea change with respect to men and marriage. Marriage began to be viewed not as a given but as a possible accompaniment to a woman’s otherwise more important and exciting independent life — and men went along for the ride. What choice did they have? Then, sometime later, America upped the ante with a full-scale war on men and, more recently, with an attack on men’s very nature.
Men and boys have heard this message loud and clear, and as a result have stepped back or stopped trying. Boys are failing to grow up and make something of themselves because they lack fathers who can help them do just that. They lack fathers because America has made it clear that men are superfluous and even dangerous to women and children.
As a result, half of America’s citizens have been marginalized, as evidenced by the meteoric rise of Jordan Peterson, who never set out to become a voice for men but inadvertently kicked over a hornet’s nest. The sheer number of males who cling to Peterson’s words of hope is staggering. He has become a lifeline to a lost generation of men.
That’s really what we’re up against this Father’s Day: a lost generation of men. But it will be our loss in the end. We can’t afford for men to retreat any further than they have. The nuclear family is the foundation of America’s greatness; and a dearth of productive men invariably means, as Tucker Carlson noted in January, the subsequent disintegration of marriage.
These two cannot be separated. Women don’t want to marry unemployed men or men who have no purpose. But women do want children and will go to great lengths to have them in unconventional ways. Thus, children (boys especially, since girls will still have their mothers) will remain fatherless, and the cycle will continue.
It is time for people to say “Enough!” We cannot survive as a nation without strong and competent men raising strong and competent boys who become the kind of men that women want to marry.
We know those in power will do nothing about it; they’ve already proven it in spades. “The elites are absolutely unwilling to send the message that fathers are as important to their children as mothers,” Mac Donald told Carlson. “Their tongues are tied — they refuse to say it. It’s one of those truths that’s being completely denied by elite culture. Why? Because it violates the feminist nostrum that women can do it all.”
And there it is.
It has been 50 years since feminists first began to make the claim that women don’t need men, and by every statistical measure we are worse off because of it. How much longer are we willing to stay silent?
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
How about another fat “free shit” budget line in the next presidential budget in lieu of a “Dad”? Maybe that will work…….
That has been in the budget since the “Great Society” was enacted.
There are a lot of absent fathers who would love to be part of their children’s lives, but the marriages that end badly (50%) almost always alienate the father to some degree. Mothers are routinely awarded custody, and many use the children as bargaining chips. There’s no such thing as a healthy parent-child relationship that involves an every-other-weekend visit with dad, who doesn’t have an extra nickel after paying child support. That situation affects at least half of America. Fatherless America has spawned a bastard civilization that nobody admires.
A study of how male juvenile elephants behave without the ‘examples’ of old herd bulls is instructive as to the outcomes children face without a father. Our angry, feral youth are perfect metaphors for a country on a world-wide rampage of destruction.
http://thesestonewalls.com/gordon-macrae/in-the-absence-of-fathers-a-story-of-elephants-and-men/
The all powerful state cannot achieve complete dominance over the populace if the family unit is allowed to remain intact. The family must be destroyed and the state become the replacement father figure in order for the state to control and manipulate the populace. That’s why white men are demonized and marginalized.
“The state is the father of children” ~ Horace Mann
Horace Mann was the first person responsible for pushing government control of education.
Control of children and their education is control of the future. Humanists have always understood this. Horace Mann, James G. Carter, and their many associates (including Senator Charles G. Sumner) were all Unitarians; they hated the Puritan faith of their forefathers with a passion. Their purpose in promoting state control of education was twofold. First, they rightfully understood that the only way to destroy Biblical faith was to control the schools and, little by little, remove Christianity and introduce Humanism. Second, they were Centralists or statist, men who believed that salvation comes by work of statist legislation or law.
“Marriage is a civil contract to which there are three parties – the husband, the wife and the state.” –Appellate Court of Illinois, NO. 5-97-0108
“The primary control and custody of infants is with the government.” –Tillman V. Roberts. 108 So. 62
“The court stands in the position of parens patria[e] of children.“ –Ayers v. Kelley, 284 Ala. 321, 224 So.2d 673 (1969)?
“”Parens patriae,” literally “parent of the country,” refers traditionally to role of state as sovereign and guardian of persons under legal disability.”–Ex parte Bayliss, 550 So.2d 986, 988 n. 1 (Ala.1989) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 1003 (5th ed.1979)).
“The state has a wide range of power for limiting parental freedom and authority in things affecting the child’s welfare… In fact, the entire familial relationship involves the State.” –Prince, 321 U.S. at 167, 64 S.Ct. at 442, 88 L.Ed. 645.
“In other words, the state is the father and mother of the child and the natural parents are not entitled to custody, except upon the state’s beneficent recognition that natural parents presumably will be the best of its citizens to delegate its custodial powers… ‘The law devolves the custody of infant children upon their parents, not so much upon the ground of natural right in the latter, as because the interests of the children, and the good of the public, will, as a general rule, be thereby promoted.’ ” –Chandler v. Whatley, 238 Ala. 206, 208, 189 So. 751, 753 (1939) (quoting Striplin v. Ware, 36 Ala. at 89).
DD,
Good article. I posted that same one to TBP about 1-2 years ago.
AmeriKan women love communism.
This all started with the No -Fault divorce law in the state of Californication under then governor Ronald Reagan. Yep, that’s right, the guy who ran for president on the platform of fighting communism who earlier adopted a communistic principle giving the state even more control over families.
“The earliest precedent in no-fault divorce laws was originally enacted in Russia shortly after the Bolshevik Revolution. They were legislated in the series of decrees that issued in early 1918. The decrees included nonjudicial dissolution of marriage by either party and mandatory provision of child-support.”
“In the 1925 Soviet conference to draft the Family Law of 1926, people debated whether marriages should even be registered. Nikolai Krylenko, a chief architect of the Soviet law of marriage and leading theorist of “socialist legality” in the 1920s and 1930s, described the purpose of divorce without restraint as a step toward the ultimate goal of the abolition of marriage, thereby establishing the socialist transformation of society.
What neuters men more, the “Divorce Industrial Complex” or drinking water out of a plastic bottle?
It makes no realistic points and does not address the societal ills of the CIA sponsored program known as feminism. Until men have equal protection under the law, men will always go their own way and avoid western women like the plaque.
Or, why all the uproar of men seeking sex robots that because of AI are about 99% real now? No risk of being taken into court and put on the scrotum stretcher and losing half your shit even if you do NOTHING WRONG. Huge ROI with a robot, no ROI with a westernized feminazi. AmeriKan women have priced themselves out of the market by not offering anything in return in the relationship and presenting a huge risk to the mans safety by siccing the state on him like an attack dog via false allegations of the various kind that will get you tossed in jail. So it all comes down to this, do you want an asset or a liability?
“Until men have equal protection under the law, men will always go their own way and avoid western women like the plaque.”
I visit the dentist twice yearly to remove all western women plaque from my teeth.
Marry an Asian or Latin woman and avoid the horrors of American wives
A woman who is a forensic psychologist started looking at these things, and wrote an intro book titled “Men on Strike” several years ago.
I would not even consider marrying any American woman. I am happily married to a feminist-despising Latina (32 years). Let these spoiled little American sluts grow old alone, childless, and bitter.
Like hell it wasn’t.
I’d trade an entire neighborhood for hers in an instant!!!!!!
Bergman or Bacall? Bacall was a raving leftist.
You mean Betty Joan (((Perske))).
Sadly the deal for a man to marry a woman is not very lucrative these days . If the man is successful and the woman is independent but still honestly shows love & respect for him as he for her it can still work to the benefit of both man , woman and their children .
Women have been bombarded and even conditioned or brainwashed by government , education and media/entertainment industry .
Rarely is a man especially a white man viewed in any positive light as a necessary family member requiring respect and any adherence to his wishes . So why should a man marry , there is really only a small chance of any benefit to him .
TV shows constantly portray the Fathers as bumbling fools who short out the House changing a light bulb or burns down the garage fixing the lawn mower . Fortunately the mother and the 9 year old daughter are on the seen just in time to save him from himself thanks to the warning from the very intelligent very well off gay couple next door . Then of course you have the ABC show The Fosters where the lesbian couple one a police person and the other a school principal (note both taxpayer funded jobs) always come to the proper resolution to foster kids problems thanks to their LGBT life style that makes them superior to anything a married man & women could ever accomplish .
Yep on Father’s Day if I had not fully funded college educations paid off a house and autos with my wife and I working together for 44 years I would be on the balcony of my beach condo knocking back some high end bourbon . Watching the sun set instead it will be done on my deck that needs replaced and a steak on the grill . The bourbon and sunset will be the same just a different zip code
My wife is western, beautiful, kind, intelligent, does laundry and other housekeeping, makes six figures from home, leans on me for “support,” is cheerful, fun, and so on. She likes honesty and moral courage. She admires manliness. Is she the exception that proves the rule? Nope. I know a number of western women very well who are not crooks in waiting. Maybe they are more numerous outside the big cities?
Owen Benjamin speaks frequently about the importance of marriage, children, family, respect, and belief in God to a happy, fulfilling life. He speaks from knowledge as he has admitted to having lived a soulless, decadent life in the past. The good thing is he seems to be inspiring alot of young listeners to reexamine their own lives. Dennis Prager’s Fireside Chats are having the same effects. Lets hope that these types of messages continue to ripple out to more of our youth.
Might be time for some to head over to Terrence Popp’s
Channel “Redonkulas.com”
There you will laugh as you learn about MiGTOW. Time
to lighten up and understand the game being played.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOIduTY0mHY
Whine much. Stating women do not need men has nothing to do with the failure of marriages. It has to do with empowering women to make a decision based on their own desires and not because society, at the time, said they could not survive on their own economically. This sentiment does not stop marriage as most people still get married.