The government solves the fatherhood crisis!

Summary: The family is dying in America. The Federal government is working to save it. Their pitiful efforts show the seriousness of the problem, and how far we are from even imagining a solution.

Your tax dollars at work. They’re laughing at dad, not with him.

Dance Like a Dad

“New Campaign with Ad Council and The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families Highlights the Importance of Small Moments Shared Between Dads and Their Children.”

See the moronic press release, “#DanceLikeaDad Encourages Dads to Dance Their Way into the Hearts of Their Most Important Audience–Their Kids“, and the hashtag.

In medicine, there is the “golden hour” after an injury in which first aid is most effective. There are similar moments in battles. The common element is that the window in time between recognition of the danger and the possibility of an effective response. We are in that now. We see that our family system is broken. How America acts in the next few decades might shape our future.

The US government responded by creating the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse. Their website deserves attention. You will see that these experts have not the slightest clue as to the problem, and their solutions are pitiful. Such as the Dance Life A Father, because they can only see fathers as assistants to women and, when operating by themselves, as entertaining buffoons.

So what do these experts believe that dad’s do? “These programs are helping fathers create loving, nurturing relationships with their children and be actively involved in their lives.” No patriarchy! No authority! Dads dancing is a perfect expression of this ideology. Unmentioned is primary role of dads: to help pay for women’s children. Whether the woman allows the dad to stay in the home is her decision.

The high rate of social pathologies of children from single-parent homes is the problem (the jury is still out on joint custody arrangements). America is not ready to consider the strong measures necessary for a cure. Let’s go to Dalrock for a deeper perspective about our crisis of fathers.

What are fathers for?

By Dalrock at his website.

Several commenters have noted the troubling image featured at the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse {above}. I’m going to partially defend the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC), as we (as a society) have asked them to do the impossible. We ask them to stress the importance of fathers, when we believe no such thing. Since around 1970 we have waged war on the very idea of fatherhood, as part of our war against The Patriarchy. Fathers are no longer accepted as the head of the family, and aside from fulfilling the role of walking wallet we no longer even have a clear accepted definition of what fathers do.

Fathers are now deputy parents, who serve at the pleasure of the mother. Moreover, it isn’t just feminists who have waged war on fathers. If anything, “traditional conservatives” are even more hostile to fathers than feminists are. Just like feminists, the My Lord Mary Lee crowd can’t stand the thought of fathers in charge.

But making this all the more difficult, we are in denial regarding our war against fathers. The official party line is some version of the following.

  1. Fathers are better now than they were in the past.
  2. Fathers are “absent” for some entirely mysterious reason.

When we ask the NRFC to teach the importance of fathers, something we as a society vehemently disagree with, we are creating a no win situation for them. They dare not speak the truth, and yet they need to be seen encouraging fatherhood or they won’t be able to justify their funding. So it isn’t surprising that the NRFC would lead with an image of fathers as comic relief. Who doesn’t love laughter? And the image of fathers as clowns is one sure to please both feminists and chivalrists.

If you scroll a bit further down the page, there are links to resources, including DadTalk, a blog on fathering.

Fatherhood resources

The most recent DadTalk blog post demonstrates the difficulty of the task we have assigned the NRFC. The post is titled “How Fathers Shape Their Children’s Development: Revisiting the Literature.” First, the post has to deal with the fact that we have done so much violence to the concept of fatherhood; before we can discuss what fathers do, we need to seriously struggle with the question of what the word father even means. This is something I’ve noted before, and for practical purposes in government statistics it often comes down to who the mother is currently having sex with.

In the modern family, the word “father” refers to a series of men who come in and out of the child’s life as their mother makes her way through the modern sexual marketplace. The posts says (red emphasis mine) …

“First, when we revisit the literature about fathers’ involvement, we need to define: what do we mean when we talk about fathers? The definition of who is a “father” has grown and developed alongside the field of fatherhood programming. We could be referring to a biological father or a stepfather, custodial or non-custodial, with a legal relationship to the child or a social one (e.g., a mother’s partner). Each has his own way of shaping the development of a child depending on when he comes into that child’s life and the amount of time he spends with the child on a regular basis.

What matters most for a father’s relationship with his children is not the specific type of family situation, but how the father chooses to involve himself in the life and well-being of his child.”

Next, the post gets into the tricky question of what the proper role of fathers should be. As deputy parent, this boils down to general parenting assistance for the primary parent (the mother). The blog cautions that “fatherhood practitioners” (I assume this means social workers) need to be “culturally sensitive” regarding the role of fathers.

“Second, the literature informs the question: what is the role of the father in the family? The literature indicates that the image of an ideal dad and notions of a father’s role in the family are diverse, and to a large extent, shaped by cultural and demographic factors. This is especially important to keep in mind for fatherhood practitioners, who should strive for cultural sensitivity and competence. The way a dad sees himself or his position in the family may vary greatly from family to family, and the way you work with or relate to that dad should take his perspective into account.”

With these two questions out of the way, the blog post finally gets to the question of what fathers should do, and what makes them special. This is, after all, the point of the post. It explains that today’s fathers are better than fathers in the past, because they know their place. In the role of mother’s helpers, now fathers focus on generic childcare and playing. This is where the post takes on an edgy counter-cultural tone sure to delight the house despot crowd, because it asserts that fathers play differently than mothers and aunts (etc.) do.

“Third, the literature continues to track the following question: in what ways are fathers involved in their families, and how is this changing? Fathers as a whole are more actively involved in the lives of their children now than they were 50 years ago. In 2016, fathers reported spending, on average, eight hours a week on child care – about three times more than in 1965. While dads previously may have been seen primarily as breadwinners, they are increasingly sharing parenting responsibilities with mothers. This increased involvement could look like any, and often all, of the following …

    • Positive engagement: direct interaction with children, including caregiving and activities.
    • Accessibility: availability to children.
    • Responsibility: participation in decision-making and ensuring that children are cared for.

“While each family balances these dimensions differently, we know that the quality of father involvement and engagement is just as, if not more, important than quantity when we talk about positive impacts on child development. Fathers can increase the quality of their involvement through many different means, including showing affection, teaching and communicating effectively, providing emotional support, sharing interests, and sharing ctivities. Research shows that, on average, fathers tend to be more involved in play than mothers. Furthermore, they tend to play differently than mothers do – engaging in more physical and challenging games and encouraging independence and risk-taking.”

It isn’t just the NRFC that struggles greatly with extolling the value of fathers fathering while agonizing over the question of who fathers are and what fathering is. See for example the National Health Statistics Report Fathers’ Involvement With Their Children: United States, 2006–2010. Like the NRFC, the report’s definition of father is a loose term where men often drift in and out of children’s lives as their mother cherishes her sexual freedom (red emphasis mine).

“Not all men are biological fathers and not all fathers have biological children. In addition to fathering a child, men may become fathers through adoption – which confers the same legal status, protections, and responsibilities to the man and the child as fathering a biological child. Men also may become de facto fathers when they marry or cohabit with women who have children from previous relationships, that is, they are raising stepchildren or their cohabiting partner’s children. In this report, men were defined as fathers if they had biological or adopted children or if step- or partner’s children were living in the household.”

As for what fathers do, the list of activities fits closely with the NRFC’s definition. Note that all of the activities used to measure the impact of fathers would just as easily work if the report were measuring the impact of aunts and grandmothers.

“This report focuses on activities that men did with their children, separately for coresidential and noncoresidential children, in the last 4 weeks. The activities by age group are presented below. For children under age 5, activities include.

    • Eating meals with or feeding the children.
    • Bathing, diapering, or dressing the children, or helping the children bathe, dress, or use the toilet themselves.
    • Playing with the children.
    • Reading to the children.

“For children aged 5–18, activities include.

    • Talking with the children about things that happened during their day.
    • Eating meals with the children.
    • Helping the children with homework or checking that the homework had been done.
    • Taking the children to or from activities.

“Men were asked how frequently they did each activity in the last 4 weeks.”

—————- End of Dalrock’s post —————-

Editor’s afterword

Patriarchy was the keystone of the family system that was one of America’s greatest strengths. We removed it, replaced it with ideology, and now condemn dads as the system crashes.

Problem recognition is usually the most difficult part of the resolution process. We have just begun to see the magnitude of the problem. The problem grows more serious with each passing year. Time is not our friend.

About Dalrock

He is a married man living with his wife and two kids in the Dallas/Fort Worth area. He is very interested in how the post-feminist world impacts himself and his family, and uses his blog to explore these issues. See his website. and his posts about marriage, about fatherhood, and especially these posts ….

For More Information

Ideas! For shopping ideas, see my recommended books and films at Amazon.

If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. See all posts about women and the gender wars, about marriage, about divorce, and especially these about the modern American family …

  1. For Father’s Day: revolutionary words that will forever change the American family.
  2. Child support payments create the new American family.
  3. Secrets about Father’s Day.
  4. Incredibles 2, a Father’s Day gift from Disney.
  5. America begins its post-marriage experiment.
  6. Becoming a post-marriage America: see the stories!
  7. Science tells us why the family is dying – And about the results.

Two major books about modern marriage

The classic: Men and Marriage by George Gilder.

Men on Strike: Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood, and the American Dream – and Why It Matters by Helen Smith.

Men and Marriage
Available at Amazon.
Men on Strike: Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood, and the American Dream - and Why It Matters
Available at Amazon.

12 thoughts on “The government solves the fatherhood crisis!”

  1. TheAmericanMuse

    The more I read and hear, the more I am grateful for and proud of my paternal line. My father and grandfather taught me, disciplined me, raised me, loved me, and were there from the very beginning. Both had their women leave them, and I still struggle to understand why.

    Let the feminists shriek and the useless, hapless mommy government grope in the dark like the blind fools they are. Let the worth of a man be shown in his words, his actions, his strength, and, god willing, we can raise the men of tomorrow and leave the lies of fools behind.

    1. TAM: You do a better job of defining a father’s role than the above government body.

      I was taught by actions, deeds, and words that fathers taught, disciplined, raised, loved, and were there from the very beginning for THEIR children. And this includes those fathers who adopted.

      One of the areas that seems to be under attack is the concept of fatherhood ownership. Of course that is how disenfranchisement works, one destroys the base. My use of a military pun is intentional. This has been the dark side of feminism.

      LK also had a point about how honor is part of our foundations (Political debate in an America without honor). The honor of a father who demanded of himself to raise his children has also been attacked. Many times it started with humor, and then went for the throat (the pocketbook). The irony of those who are destroying the foundation of marriage while trying to ensure the economic well being for their chosen victors (women) should not be lost on anybody. Their recipe for freedom is that it stops where a man’s wallet starts. Fathers need not apply.

      But as in procreation, it takes two. Rather than blame men, they should look in the mirror. Yet, I doubt no matter how many times Darlock and LK point this out, the ugly visage of toxic femininity is too much for their contemplation.

      1. John,

        All of this has happened with the cooperation or passive acceptance of men. This is part of our great abdication – abandoning our responsibility as fathers and citizens. Sometimes that means acting to defend our nation and families. Instead we complain and find other things to occupy our time.

        Nothing will change until we change.

      2. Yes, I agree Larry. I was singling women out, but realize that it will take not just men and women, but our institutions as well. For those who open their eyes, other’s mistakes and errors illuminate a better attempt, if not success.

        I married late; but before I married, I watched as friends and family began a descent into marital and familial hell by, not just abdication, but what they pursued after and by their abdication. As you allude, it is not just the inaction caused by abdication, but also what we pursue as our actions that help make the total. It was ironic the number of those with failing or problematic life styles who advised me about what I was doing wrong. Yet, my marriage is old and strong, and my children loving and successful. And since it takes two, my success is my wife’s, and her success is mine.

        I agree with you about change. And there is something each person can do to effect that change. At least attempt to do well. You are than likely to do well with practice. Marriage is hard, but rewarding.

      3. Part of that abdication is failure to act against no fault divorce and the Duluth Model of domestic violence. As well as allowing themselves to lose the ideological war to radical feminists.

        Underestimating the power of ideas.

  2. My two cents on the joint custody issue (my having more time with them): My children turned out just fine, both are successful business people, and are in stable relationships which have lasted longer than my marriages. Dad is proud of them and happy for them.

    If there is a divorce involving children (the limited number I have seen), the joint custody arrangements seem to provide the children with a better outcome than single mother situations.

    1. Chad,

      One person’s experience means zip. Most children turn out fine, even under horrendous circumstances. But the incidence of bad outcomes – from dysfunctional to sociopaths – need not be high to cause considerable social disruption.

      “the limited number I have seen”

      Also meaningless. They would have to be pretty bad for you to notice as an outsider. The results of family living arragements are studied using surveys that follow people over time or look at larger numbers of people at various ages – rather than just asking some friends for their results and writing up a paper.

  3. Pingback: The State of Children's Media ⋆ Michael Musgrove

  4. “All of this has happened with the cooperation or passive acceptance of men.”

    A lot of what led to the current state of affairs seemed a good idea at the time. How many would have guessed that women would use every opportunity afforded to them to go for men’s jugular?
    Supporting patriarchy now means standing against most women, all the men they can drag along, massive state and corporate power.
    Realistically only partial success against some of the worst eccesses (kangaroo courts etc.) would be likely.
    Likely patriarchy is not going to come back until having to put up with beta males is again a necessary evil.

    1. Satepestage,

      I suggest looking at the posts about solutions. They might give you a different perspective about these things.

      “Likely patriarchy is not going to come back”

      We can learn from history, we can be inspired by history – but we cannot bring back the past any more than we can bring the dead back to life. We have to find new ways into the future.

    2. “Supporting patriarchy now means standing against most women, all the men they can drag along, massive state and corporate power.
      Realistically only partial success against some of the worst eccesses (kangaroo courts etc.) would be likely.
      Likely patriarchy is not going to come back until having to put up with beta males is again a necessary evil.”

      “Athanasius, early bishop of Alexandria, stoutly opposed the teachings of Arius, who declared that Christ was not the eternal Son of God, but a subordinate being. Hounded through five exiles, he was finally summoned before emperor Theodosius, who demanded he cease his opposition to Arius. The emperor reproved him and asked, “Do you not realize that all the world is against you?” Athanasius quickly answered, “Then I am against all the world.”

      -Source Unknown(probably fictional)

      In regards to Christianity. Since such is right because its inherent to the religion. They have no choice but to take the stance of Athanasius.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: