Fathers – the first Great Reset Victims

Parental Rights Activists could see this “Great Reset” of the World Economic Forum (WEF) coming for everyone else as it was applied to them many years ago.  Many are becoming aware of the “new socialism” of the WEF which uses high taxes and burdensome regulations combined with a surveillance state to control you (instead of Marxist direct control of business and individuals).  That is what has been done to fathers and families and it is the reason we have such a high out-of-wedlock and divorce rate and why many young people are not getting married nor having children.  

Marxism has at its roots a desire to destroy the nuclear family which they proudly proclaim publicly.  While Marxist Critical Race Theory (CRT) is now being used to undermine parental rights and raising of your own children it was Marxist Radical Feminist Theory (RFT) which first assaulted the family.  Both evolved from the Frankfort School’s Marxist Critical Theory to create a world which “satisfies the needs of human beings” and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see when placed side by side the Great Reset, RFT, and CRT are the same, socialism with a differently named bourgeois and oppressed proletariat.  

Just as the Great Reset has been in motion moving slowly over decades, the government regulation of the family and driving fathers out of the family has been occurring over decades, each decade getting more onerous in directing individual behavior.  In the 1950s White Fatherless Homes exceeded Black Fatherless Homes.  Enter President Johnson and his “Great Society” of social programs for women and children. Black Fatherless Homes skyrocketed to 20% in the early 1960s, labelled a crisis, and Daniel Patrick Moynihan published “The Negro Family: A Case for National Action,” now known as the Moynihan Report.  The report received pushback from the African American Community as it was viewed as blaming African American men for the breakdown in the African American Family.

Enter the RFT in the 1970s and the war on “the patriarchy.”  Far from being a war on those who held the reigns of power in government and industry it was a war on men in general, including fathers and blue class working families.  Who needs a man was the common refrain. In 1970 No Fault Divorce was enacted in California and quickly spread to most other states.  Even in NY, which didn’t enact No Fault Divorce until 2010, a woman only needed to go to family court and make ex parte allegations of an unfit spouse and was virtually guaranteed to get child custody, child support, and a separation agreement which would be turned into a divorce after one year of constructive “abandonment.”

The standard for awarding custody in family courts was the Tender Years Doctrine, that being young children would go with the mother for their tender years but older children would go to the father and his “firm hand” as they were learning to navigate in the world.  But over time the standard was changed state by state to the best interest of the child standard.  This shifted decision making on what is the best interest of the child from the parents to the judge. Through the 1980s and 1990s bias in the courts had them awarding mother custody over 85% of the time in divorce cases and almost 100% in out-of-wedlock births, in all cases making one of the child’s biological parents “non custodial” with limited parenting time.  Parental rights stripped without cause. 

And over this time, increasingly, 2 parent families were dragged into family court at the request of child social agencies and the judge’s opinion inserted over those of both parents.  Cases are easy to find where parents left a child unattended but in a safe place yet the police were called and child neglect charged. Schools started to refer cases where parents refused to follow the dictate of the administrative state, such as one whose parents declined to put a child on drugs for ADHD preferring to try alternative methods first. Parents have been hauled into family curt because they made their child attend church too often even though in accordance with their beliefs. Once the courts made one parent a “non” (custodial) parent it became easier and easier for the Judge to impose his opinion of the best interests of the child on both parents.  How long before parents are dragged into family court for NOT teaching their child CRT?

Increasing out-of-wedlock birth rates and exploding divorce numbers had “single mother” homes increasing, and increasingly they turned to daddy government to help them financially. As federal coffers were strained government looked for a funding source to replenish expenditures.  Enter the “deadbeat dad” under the Reagan administration where popular media was used to portray fathers who “abandoned their financial obligation” to their children.  Never mind it was the “single mother” who decided to get pregnant and rely on daddy government, it was “deadbeat dads” fault.  As the money was to go to federal coffers the amount of “child support” wasn’t based on the needs of the child but assessed as a percentage of gross income of the father, a per child excise tax.

Even though marriage and divorce were state issues, a Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement was developed and a counter office in each and every state in the nation working under the federal guidelines with reimbursements of money to the states to ensure compliance. Before this a father was ensured access to his children as that was when he picked up his kids he delivered the child support check directly to the mother, no kids, no money.  Now she could, and many were, refusing to deliver the children at court ordered times but as his “child support” went direct to the state he was thus forced back into family court to try to get back the lost time with his children, which caused greatly overburdened courts to admonish mothers to not do it again with no penalties.

Initially directed towards out-of-wedlock births the Child Support System couldn’t get any returns as it turns out poor women have out-of-wedlock babies with poor men who can’t pay in to the system due to lack of income.  So to show that they were “successful” the system increasingly looked to include those fathers, mostly from divorce cases, where they were already paying child support on time and in full.  Many states now directed that ALL child support payments had to go through the government.  When the federal government included an incentive for cases with a health insurance order, millions across America were served with an administrative order directing they provide health insurance for children already on their health insurance. “Problem” solved with a windfall to the states.

In 1984 the Duluth Project was begun to address domestic violence against women, ignoring violence in families with child and/or father victims.  Even though early domestic violence shelter operators were reporting that the mothers were often as violent as the fathers, the Duluth Model was developed along RFT and it held that ALL domestic violence was because a man wanted power and control over his wife and children.  When (then) Senator Joe Biden introduced the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) it was based upon the Duluth Model.  VAWA passed in 1994 and has dutifully been reauthorized by both Republican and Democrat alike to the tune of billions of dollars, most of which funds radical feminists and RFT, CRT, and the Great Reset.

When police on the street weren’t arresting enough men due to women not filing complaints (or not showing up in court to testify) mandatory arrest laws were passed which required an arrest if any party was injured.  This in spite of the fact it is considered prosecutorial misconduct to arrest a person who obviously can’t be convicted.  When police started arresting both parties as much of domestic violence is mutual the laws were changed to arrest only the “primary aggressor” which was defined as the larger person, more intimidating, in effect describing men. To help identify the primary aggressor Domestic Violence registries were set up in every state.  Unlike relying on adjudicated cases the registries rely on domestic violence reports, often by one party, with no opportunity to have the case adjudicated by the other party.  There is no expunging your name form the record for the innocent.

The socialist daddy state has been very successful in destroying the African American Family as it is widely reported 80% are “father absent” homes. Like in the Moynihan Report we keep blaming Black Men for this.  CRT would have us believe that it is “institutional racism” yet the greatest income disparity isn’t between Blacks and Whites, it is between college educated Blacks (who run the cities that Poor Blacks live in) and non college educated Blacks. Having decimated Black Men and Boys and their families the New Socialists need to move on to the rest of families.  15% of White families are headed by the mother, 5% by the father with CRT and school control of children looking to undermine the remaining 80% of 2 parent families. Using “toxic masculinity” and “believe all women” they are looking to drive fathers out of families. Families are dissipating just in time for the Great Reset.

Marriage is hostile to men, and can also be to a female spouse out earning her husband.  Many forego marriage not because of men or women but because government controls it and thus controls the finances of the family.  Many are foregoing marriage but still creating a home with 2 biological parents of their children. 75% of White families have 2 biological parents while only 39% of Black families* do.  We don’t know how many of these families Black and White Fathers are actively involved in the raising of their children for the government keeps no statistics on that, indeed most states have no access enforcement for court ordered parenting time for parents labelled ‘non custodial.”  It is apparent the next “critical theory” has to attack the White 2 biological parent families and I believe the Marxist CRT combined with the Great Rest is designed to do just that.  The issue isn’t one of race or sex, it is will we allow the “educated class” to dictate to us working class folks how to live our lives and raise our children?

We have gone from “shiftless” black men, to “deadbeat dads”, to “toxic masculinity” and I think it’s time for men and boys, and the women who love them, to say enough.  This led to conservative families being labelled “right wing” zealots, parents opposed to CRT being labelled “domestic violent extremists,” and I say it’s time for parents and traditional families to say enough is enough.  We’ll bond with a mate, have our children, and raise them as we see fit.  And we don’t need your theories and government regulation of the family, we can figure out life on our own based upon our heritage and beliefs, free individuals entering into our social contract of a family beholden only to God, family, country, and community.  

*Note there are discrepancies in reported numbers of homes by head of household and marital status and/or unmarried long term biological parents or those separated households that have both parents active in raising their children. The last federally funded research on fathers was in the 1990’s (Sanford Braver) and updated, unbiased, and accurate statistics and studies are needed.

It’s Well Past Time to reform VAWA

Senator Joni Ernst; (https://www.ernst.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/email-joni)

I am writing you in regard to VAWA as I understand you are tasked with writing the 2021 senate version. First, the Violence Against WOMEN Act by name is discriminatory to men and boys, both gay and straight, who suffer domestic violence and it should be changed to reflect that is directed towards combatting domestic violence within families. Even though legal decisions stated that men and boy victims could not be excluded by name of the act and in practice they are to this day.

“Joke” Meme circulating on social media, ironically highlighting the plight of male victims of domestic violence.

I refer you to Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting and their recommendations, (at http://www.mediaradar.org/docs/RADARdocument-Agenda-for-VAWA-Reform.pdf) to correct some of the problems in VAWA. Unbiased DV Research can also be found at https://domesticviolenceresearch.org. I would also suggest Phillip W. Cook’s book “Abused Men: the Hidden Side of Domestic Violence” which should be part of the library of anyone writing DV legislation.

Stop the lies and bigotry Meme

NAGR and other gun rights groups, to which I am a life member, complain that the “Red Flag” laws, long a problem in the family rights arena, are being pushed with 135 “Republican’s” voting for these laws applied to our military personnel. False allegations of abuse, combined with the mistaken belief that all DV is male perpetrators and female victims, have long been used to gain leverage in divorce and child custody proceedings. Additionally, those who bear false witness are rarely, if ever, held accountable for their lies. My horror story of false allegations when I was a NYS Environmental Conservation Police Officer (now retired) can be found at https://nymensactionnetwork.org/2021/04/lets-red-flag-unconstitutional-red-flag-laws/. I wrote about the unconstitutional nature of red flag laws here. What was designed as a shield for victims has been turned into a sword for those that would abuse the system and turn the system into an abuser on their behalf.

As A Republican I can only wonder why those in our party continue to authorize these vast funds which are funneled primarily to left wing groups pushing the anti family socialist agenda. Worse, the programs, when audited, are generally found to be fraught with fraud and misuse of funds. Some of these cases are outlined at https://www.saveservices.org/2021/03/vawa-long-standing-and-widespread-waste-fraud-and-abuse. As a co-founder and past President of the Coalition of Fathers and Families NY Inc. (I hold a Bachelors Degree in Family and Society from SUNY ESC) in the early 2000’s when I was researching this issue one DV services organization advised me how they “counted each client 4 times” by sending them to various “services” such as counseling or legal advice, and counted them even if they said they didn’t need the service. The Washington Times in 2019 reported on the fraud that is occurring in one part of VAWA, immigration citizenship, and that is not alone. In 2011 Sen. Grassley stated, “the problem with VAWA grantees’ administration and record keeping may actually be getting worse.” What was designed as a shield for victims has been turned into a biased political boondoggle, and it continues to this day.

I attended training and was certified by NYS as a police instructor for domestic violence. I can tell you first hand that the training was biased against men and was based on the debunked Duluth Model which has it that all Domestic Violence is perpetrated by men. Primary aggressor was defined as someone who was “larger” and “intimidating” and was nothing less than double speak for “arrest the man”. I found the training to be nothing less than indoctrination which was contrary to police training and tactics conducted in concert with constitutional protections ( I was a certified police special topics instructor on multiple topics). When called on to instruct I refused to do so as the course materials and lesson plan could “not be changed” in any fashion whatsoever. “This Way to the Revolution: A Memoir” by Erin Prizzey, who opened a shelter in England in 1971 explains how the system has been usurped by radical feminists.

While it certainly provides some services for victims of DV we have to ask ourselves at what cost to civil rights and at what cost to American taxpayers. It is well past time for a name change. It is well past time to remove sexual biases against male victims. It is well past time for the program to ensure that it is not undermining the U.S. Constitution and the rights of all individuals guaranteed therein.

James H. Hays, Lt. (Ret) NYS En-Con Police

CC: National Association for Gun Rights provided the following contact emails which were accepted – pat_souders@durbin.senate.gov, john_dowd@leahy.senate.gov, lindsey_kerr@klobuchar.senate.gov, reynaldo_benitez@ossoff.senate.gov, aaron_cummings@grassley.senate.gov, richard_perry@lgraham.senate.gov, “Beth_Jafari@cornyn.senate.gov” Beth_Jafari@Cornyn.senate.gov, steve_chartan@cruz.senate.gov, kyle_plotkin@hawley.senate.gov, doug_coutts@cotton.senate.gov, ted_lehman@tillis.senate.gov, kaleb_froehlich@murkowski.senate.gov

Men want empathy – not sympathy

In an Op-Ed in the Epoch Times (https://www.theepochtimes.com/who-cares-about-male-suffering_3891890.html).  Janice Fiamingo opens with the fact that July 11 is Gender Empathy Gap Day designed to bring awareness to societal indifference to the suffering of men and boys.  She goes on to provide multiple examples which I encourage you to find in the article itself.  What I found troubling as a MRA/FRA were the comments to “man up” opposite those that stated they had “sympathy” for men and boys.  

I post a link to the difference between the empathy called for and the sympathy offered here, https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/sympathy-empathy-difference. As Ms Fiamingo point out, what we are looking for is EMPATHY, a simple recognition that men and boys who suffer are treated poorly by both men and women.  You don’t have to have been victimized yourself and “feel my pain” and sympathize.  You simply need to recognize the disparate treatment that men suffer and recognize it as wrong.  As she plainly states this isn’t a victimhood contest between men and women, “it does seek to prompt recognition of our collective inability or unwillingness to recognize the humanity of men”.  

The man up and don’t be a soy boy crowd is dismissing the issue out of hand without even looking to see if there is merit to the complaint.  Of course attacking the “soy boys” allows them to avoid having to speak to the multitude of facts presented in the piece.  Ironically this argument supports Ms. Fiamingo’s position that the societal indifference to the suffering of men exists.  Having sympathy also can ignore the problem for feeling my pain and sharing my feelings does not necessarily translate into working to correct the problem which caused my pain.  

Being a career law enforcement officer, I have never committed a crime with a female accomplice (it’s frowned on in my profession) and I don’t have sympathy for a criminal sent to prison as I’ve never been one.  But if he was sent to prison and she given probation for doing the same crime I do have empathy for his disparate treatment which is obviously bias for being male.  And in my 30 year career I was witness to and can attest to preferential treatment given to women by law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and judges for both minor and major offenses.

In the olden days (1990’s) we used to have fathers rights meetings face to face.  The “man up” crowd referred to them as “pity parties” and did not attend, dismissing the plight of others.  The sympathy crowd would attend the meetings for the emotional support but wouldn’t get politically active to work to change the system.  Regardless of their level of victimization by the system, it was those who had empathy for others who would fight for change.  Parents, siblings, and second spouses were often the most vocal for change driven by their empathy for another.

Within the Men’s Rights, Fathers Rights, Parental Rights movements we see the same lack of empathy.  Home schoolers and conservative Christians pushed the Parental Rights and Responsibilities Act but specifically excluded “non custodial” parents from the act.  When I co-founded the Coalition of Fathers and Families NY, Inc. (FaFNY) I was told, by males and females, that I should change the name as it wasn’t “inclusive”even though the mission statement supported equal rights for both parents and both parents rights free from government interference.  Bias towards fathers and fathers rights is what allows them to be removed as a parent and their parental rights.

And we have our share of “man ups” in the FRA/MRA movement.  After 3 years of litigation I was arrested, suspended from work, dead broke, with $20 in my pocket and the clothes on my back with a borrowed car and place to sleep.  With an OOP over my head based on false allegation and violation of that being a felony I tried to get my access exchange at a neutral location and was denied.  Faced with certain felony arrest should I try to get my kids at her residence I stopped picking them up and she refused to deliver them.  At the next meeting I was told to “fight harder”. “Don’t give up”, in effect to man up and sacrifice myself.  You can see those types of comments all over MRA/FRA social media pages.  As if manning up and fighting harder with self sacrifice in a system designed to drain you financially and emotionally will somehow result in a different outcome.

I co-founded the NY Men’s Action Network (originally a PAC) and was a principal lobbyist in Albany for 10 years advocating for parental rights and court reform.  There are many politicians who knew how bad the system was and didn’t care to reform it.  But the bulk of them were uninformed and my factual stories were dismissed with an “it couldn’t be that bad”, certainly my being male and the lack of empathy for men played a part in limiting reform as the vast majority of negative outcomes in (anti) family court and the system occur to men.

In my 25 years of work with FaFNY I have well over 1000 contact hours with individuals and groups in peer support and counseling.  The vast majority of persons I counseled wanted empathy; to be listened to, for their story to be believed, and for recognition that they received a raw deal.  While they were the victim of the system by having their individual and parental rights destroyed they were not victims themselves looking for others to correct their problems, they were looking to get others to stop causing their problems.  This is much different than the “victim” who blames life’s problems on their race, sex, or life circumstance and looks to others to give them something for free to fix it.

Lack of empathy for men and boys has us ignoring the problems of men and boys. The first act to correct a problem is to recognize what the problem is. A lack of empathy and dismissing the problems prevents us from that first act.  And in the multitude of problems facing men and boys; suicide, crime victims, disparate incarceration, denial of parental rights, and on and on there is one underlying facet of each of these problems, a lack of empathy for men and boys.

I disagree with Ms. Fiamingo one one thing, I think every day should be a day of empathy for boys and men.  I encourage you to read the article and use it to hone your debate skills in support of men and boys.   And if you are looking for more information on boys and men you can go to the Global Initiative for Boys and Men https://www.gibm.us/home, or the National Coalition For Men https://ncfm.org.  

James Hays, Lt. (Ret) NYS En-Con Police, past President FaFNY, past Director NY MAN.