Does The National Organization of Women think men/fathers are irrelevant?

Question

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/28/AR2007032802065_pf.html

It's called the Promoting Responsible Fatherhood Initiative, and the Bush administration doles out up to $50 million annually to fund its programs to build job skills and help fathers connect better with their children. But the National Organization for Women says the effort is illegal because it's only about men.

NOW and Legal Momentum, another advocacy group, filed complaints yesterday with the Department of Health and Human Services alleging sex discrimination in the initiative that is funding about 100 programs this year.

Why would they not APPLAUD an effort to make men better fathers?

Answer 1

Lot's of good answers here (on both sides). So I'll tweak everyone with this: would NOW be opposed if the group were

Male Choice: Men in Favor of Abortion Rights

I think BOTH sides here know the answer to that one. And that answer describes the hypocrisy better than I ever could.

Answer 2

The Bush Administration doles out money? Unless I missed something, like a major change in the Constitution, the Congress makes laws and controls the purse. Congress hands out money.

Within The executive branch are many departments, of course. Which department is doing this, The Department of Human Services? Old Tommy Thompson's outfit?

Within DHS are literally THOUSANDS of programs, some which help ONLY women, some which help ONLY men.

Have you ever heard of WIC (Women, infants, children)? It's about the biggest program there is. And the WOMEN part is in the freaking title of the program, for God's sake!

NOW is a bunch of femi-nazi's, whose power and influence, and membership, have been on a serious decline for the past 20 years or so. Not even women (straight women, anyway) want to be known to have any association with NOW.

As for their suit: best of luck to them. Anyone can sue anyone for anything they want. Whether or not thay can win is something else entirely. And if they do? What do they win, equal access to job training? Fine, great. But there are plenty of similar programs for women too, and that's what DHS will say.

Answer 3

There will always be someone yelling because they aren't included. People like to nit pick the legalities instead of looking at the bigger picture - in this case getting some men to be more involved and better fathers.

I think its great that there is something out there for the "Dads". There have been so many studies done about the family demographics and gang involvement & drug use in kids. Any that I have ever seen show a definite correlation between higher rates in children without both a mother-figure and father-figure. Kids need to have parents or parental figures - of both genders. The sad truth is that its usually the father that is out of the picture.

But then again - look at NOW... "of women"... that's a little exclusionary in itself, huh?

Answer 4

Did the Bush Administration foster a program to help women become better mothers? We have a national problem with that as well, perhaps they are concerned that the government doesn't recognize that fact. I would heartily applaud programs aimed at making ALL people better parents, not just men, why hasn't that happened?

Here's a quote from your link:
"What we're asking them to do is to make sure that the grantees provide equal services to women and men," said Kathy Rodgers, president of Legal Momentum. "It should be a parenthood initiative."

Seems reasonable to me, it doesn't to you? I'm failing to see how that identifies the organization as thinking men are irrelevant.

Answer 5

Because programs like this are funded from the pockets of men and women alike, not just men. Promoting Responsible Parenthood, would be a much better initiative and would equally cover both genders in their efforts to create better parenting skills.

The Black College fund is under the same scrutiny, if we wish to acheive equality among students then how fair is it to provide monies based on black or white criteria.

I don't always agree with NOW, but I have to go with them on this.

Answer 6

The 92% Female Child Custody Rate Speaks For Itself.

Answer 7

Politics, especially fund raising, seem to be a motivating factor. When they come with an issue on which to buck the government, it helps with recruiting members and bringing cash.

Answer 8

Because some women need to learn to be better mothers too...

I know a lot of people, myself included, that were raised by their fathers. It needs to be all inclusive. That's what they're saying.

Answer 9

There are millions of single mothers out there. What help are they getting with job skills? They pay taxes so why aren't they entitled to benefits that will help them be a better provider and parent?

Answer 10

In 1998, I had the opportunity to work for the Virginia Board of Governors on a research project involving joint parenting. What I discovered shocked me. The NOW is "in bed" with various father's rights groups (in fact, one document had their names all listed on the same letterhead).

Interestingly, promoting father's rights is one of the biggest problems facing single mothers today. Because fathers have economic incentive to gain greater parenting time, with no one to over-see the enforcement of it. Fathers pay less child support and don't bother to pick up the kids.

The NOW has an interest in promoting the break ups of the traditional family, to keep their lobby alive. They have no incentive nor motivation to promote actual fatherhood. That might lead to the erradication of radical feminism.

So, they are dead in the center of the sex controversy, playing both sides against the middle. Big bad apple. The truth is, they hate men, they hate women, they hate children. They lobby on misery.