|
Saturday, April 19, 2003
"The fiercely private Bush dynasty is facing its first tell-all book, written by the estranged wife of Neil Bush, the President's brother ... Sharon Bush, who is embroiled in bitter divorce proceedings after 23 years of marriage, has also discussed a possible collaboration with Kitty Kelley, the notoriously acidic celebrity biographer, her spokesman told the New York Observer."
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 5:11 PM |Link
A sad, troubling story on adoption:Bren Hoadley had waited long enough to become a mother. Childless in her late 40s, with a career as a public-school teacher surrounded by other people's children, she had a 13-year-old failed marriage and three years of gut-wrenching infertility treatments behind her. Neither produced the child she craved. So she had turned to an adoption agency that matches childless prospective parents with abandoned infants and toddlers in Russia and Ukraine, her heart set on adopting a baby girl stranded in an orphanage. She paid a fortune, never got a baby, and now wants her money back, though the adoption people in the Ukraine say that the woman was insisting not only on a girl baby, but a girl with a certain color hair, etc.
In general, it strikes me that, for a single woman who wants to be a mother, adopting a child who is being bounced around orphanages or foster homes is morally much more admirable than getting pregnant.
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 5:01 PM |Link
DO ROMANCE WRITERS DO IT BETTER?:At one point in the unwinding-evening conversation, thoughts turn to marriage. Roberts says her parents were married for 62 years. "A happy marriage," she says. She, too, is in a good marriage, she says. They've been together almost 18 years. One by one, the women go around the room and tell how long their parents have been or were married. Blayney's parents were married for nearly 30 years. McComas's for 32 and the parents of Harbison and McShulskis were married 26 years. Everybody springs from happy marriages. There is a pause in the conversation as the women think about it. They look at each other and they begin to think of other romance writers they know. Perhaps there is more to writing popular romances than dashing characters, heaving bosoms, flirtatious scenes and teasing ellipses that lead like moist footprints to the unmade bed . . . Just about every successful romance writer they can name is the product of a long, happy marriage. Why? Making domestic noises, Wilder rummages around in another part of the house. There is a contemplative mood in the kitchen and yellow-orange light and perfumic fragrances. "Because," one of the women says, "you've seen the happily-ever-after."
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 4:21 PM |Link
Two new studies show that teens with strong religious views are less likely to engage in risky behaviors, including sex, smoking, drinking and marijuana use.
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 11:26 AM |Link
Friday, April 18, 2003
LIVING TOGETHER AFTERWARDS: "In Hollywood, all marriages are happy. It's trying to live together afterwards that causes the problems," said Shelley Winters.
OK, maybe she's just trying to get off a funny line, but doesn't it seem as if, for Winters, "marriage" means the ceremony on the wedding day, and that "trying to live together afterwards" is something different? In terms of how our public understanding is evolving, is she on to something?
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 5:37 PM |Link
THE IMPORTANCE OF "PARENTS": In the Jackson (MS) Clarion-Ledger, a columnist writes about three local childen -- boys, ages 10, 12, and 15 -- recently arrested for stealing at the mall. He says that these arrests are examples of a big problem in our society, and that it takes "lots of players" to help young boys today stay out of trouble:The issue clearly is much larger than law enforcement. The education community must develop creative strategies that identify at-risk students and motivate them to remain in school. Some of that is already happening. Jackson has started Morrison Academic Advancement Center for struggling middle school students who are at risk of dropping out. The state Department of Education has a new computerized system of tracking student attendance, just one element of its dropout reduction strategy. Several GED programs, including one at Jackson State University, are available. The faith-based community, in the businesses of changing lives, must also become more intimately involved. Other service organizations must also be committed to becoming change agents. Now is not the time to stand on the sidelines. Still, the primary responsibility lies with parents. Parenting is serious business, an awesome responsibility. Parents must know how their children are doing in class and what they are doing at the mall. All good ideas, but am I the only one to fret over the fact that this columnist, even as he waxes strong on the importance of "parents," can't seem to bring himself to use the word "fathers," or to refer to the large and growing body of evidence suggesting that father absence -- more than anything having to do with an abstraction called "parents" -- is the main engine driving the problem that he is describing?
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 4:08 PM |Link
CHEAP SHOT: In an op-ed criticizing the currrent Wade Horn/HHS proposal to include support for marriage as part of re-authorizing welfare reform, and more broadly what she terms the "surging marriage movement" in the U.S., Linda C. McLain writes:Helping people interested in marrying to form successful marriages sounds fairly reasonable until we realize that Horn dismisses equal sharing of parenting roles inside a marriage as a misguided quest for ``androgyny.'' He and his allies claim not to want ``to turn back the clock'' to marriage based on male dominance and female subordination and economic vulnerability. They even assert that healthy marriage must be premised on ``equal regard.'' But few in the marriage movement understand this to mean that mothers and fathers have equal privileges and responsibilities in the worlds of politics, work and the home. I know Linda McLain, and I respect some of her work in this field, but I'm amazed that, instead of engaging the real issues, she would resort to this kind of obviously uninformed name-calling. There are some legitimate reasons to doubt or question the current Bush Administration proposals on marriage, but imagining some kind of federal plot to turn back the clock on gender equality is not one of them.
Here's a giveaway. In her piece, McLain informs us that marriage education programs "presumably" -- did you see what just happened? -- would teach that women should essentially be barefoot and in the kitchen, dutifully following the orders issued by the Head of the House. What absolute drivel. That telling qualifier "presumably" really means: "I don't know anything about this and I'm just guessing." No reasonable person with even a rudimentary knowledge of the main marriage education curricula in use today would ever make such a preposterous allegation. At one point McLain even talks about women not being able to get credit cards without their husbands' consent -- like this is the kind of idea, or way of thinking, that the marriage movement endorses or is seeking to revive via welfare reform. Amazing.
Linda McLain wants to argue for equality between husbands and wives and for more flexible and equal gender roles in marriage. Good for her. So do lots and lots of people in the "surging marriage movement." So it would save everyone some time if she and others who share her concerns would just take the time to familiarize themselves at least in a minimal way with these programs before continuing publicly to attack them; realize that, at least with respect to federal welfare policy, all they really have to do is be willing to take "yes" for an answer, even if the "yes" is coming from the terrible Bush Administration; and then move on analytically to some real, as opposed to almost purely imaginary, issues that will be facing us as we debate these policy proposals in the coming months.
P.S. In a classic example of debating a straw man, McLain declares that if policy makers really wanted to strengthen marriage without undermining women's rights, they would recognize the need for "economic empowerment" strategies for low-income parents and spouses. Leaving aside her false "either/or" framing of the choices -- you can either be for marriage education or for economic empowerment -- what's so annoying about this argument is that McLain is ignoring the fact that many leaders in and around the marriage and fatherhood movements, as well as many policy makers who care about this issue, have gone to much greater lengths that Linda McLain ever has to stress the importance of ecomomic empowerment as an important part of any strategy aimed at strengthening marriage in low-icome communities. Again, about the only thing she has to decide is whether she's willing to take "yes" for an answer.
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 1:49 PM |Link
MARRIAGE IN AMERICA:Attorney General Bill Lockyer was set to marry an Orange County civil rights attorney today in a private ceremony in Northern California, his spokesman said. Lockyer, 61, and Nadia Maria Davis, 31, met during Democratic Party activities and are expecting a baby late this summer ... Lockyer has been married twice before ... Lockyer formed a committee in January to raise money to run for governor in 2006 ... Barankin said he planned to be the ``best attorney general he can be, and he's also committed to being the best husband and father he can be.'' This guy may become governor. An amazing line, about best father he can be. We really do live in a wilder-than-fiction, over-the-top, pig-stomping country.
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 1:30 PM |Link
MOVE OVER, DR. PHIL?: On Tuesday, April 22, Roland Warrren of the National Fatherhood Initiative is scheduled to be on Oprah -- for the third time in the past seven months. The guy's a hit.
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 10:51 AM |Link
Thursday, April 17, 2003
In Louisiana, some legislators want to get rid of the 72 hour waiting period between the marriage licence and the marriage -- the sponsor, apparently seriously, asks "what better way to support marriage?" -- while others want to re-introduce fault into divorce law. I don't think prospects are good for either bill.
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 3:05 PM |Link
Whatever happened to elopement?
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 1:00 PM |Link
FROM BRITAIN: "I am also a feminist. Lots of my friends are feminists. I teach women's studies to dozens of undergraduates who readily call themselves feminists. The "I'm a woman and I can do anything I want so we don't need feminism" brigade - the prophets of "post-feminism" - haven't duped them. My students are not stupid. Yet all the same, people keep telling me that feminism is dead."
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 12:57 PM |Link
Bill McKibben on designer children.
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 12:45 PM |Link
FROM CANADA: "We may actually get the decriminalization of marijuana and the legitimization of same-sex marriages, if for no other reason than to keep Mr. Chr�tien's government busy."
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 12:42 PM |Link
FROM CANADA, BUILT TO LAST: "Separation agreements are built to last and ought to be respected unless truly unforeseen circumstances lead to a situation �that cannot be condoned,� the Supreme Court ruled Thursday. Its landmark ruling went against a woman � Linda Miglin � who felt that changes in her life entitled her to a more generous settlement than the one she had negotiated with her estranged spouse, Eric Miglin."
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 12:40 PM |Link
HOW MUCH DOES IT HURT? It depends on what day you ask them: "...other research projects... reveal fundamental biochemical differences in how men and women deal with pain. They found that [fluctuating] sex hormones like estrogen play a big part in how we react to pain....That finding helps explain how women, the so-called weaker sex, can deal with the excruciating pain of childbirth."
posted by Elizabeth Marquardt
at 11:57 AM |Link
A little town in California takes an anti-adultery law off the books.
posted by Elizabeth Marquardt
at 11:51 AM |Link
THE NEW YORKER ON THE WEDDING INDUSTRY: "Apart from a brief, alarming moment in the nineteen-seventies when dress manufacturers stooped to the demands of hippie brides by offering bridal blouses rather than dresses, weddings have only got bigger and grander, as if the extravagance of the ceremony might keep at bay the hobgoblins of divorce statistics." [article not available online]
posted by Elizabeth Marquardt
at 11:48 AM |Link
Lots of information and links from the BBC on domestic violence.
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 10:29 AM |Link
"Study after study has shown that men have a higher tolerance for pain than women, according to researchers who seem to be making some progress in figuring out why."
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 10:26 AM |Link
Wednesday, April 16, 2003
ON DOWNSHIFTING: If Americans could feel reasonably confident that their health care, retirements, and children's higher education would be paid for or comfortably subsidized by the state, I suspect more of them would be downshifting too. Uncertainty is part of what drives the American go-get-'em attitude.
posted by Elizabeth Marquardt
at 11:34 AM |Link
Arguments over welfare reform involving New York City, the Progressive Policy Institute, and a new study from the Manhattan Institute.
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 11:20 AM |Link
"'If a child can have three parents, why not four or six or a dozen?' Judge Aston asked.": He knows the two women who tuck him into bed at night as Momma and is thrilled by visits twice a week from his biological father. But the carefree two-year-old boy being raised by three doting adults is forbidden to have more than two parents. The child's trio of would-be parents are "heartbroken" after a family-court judge from the Superior Court of Justice in London, Ont., turned down a request from the woman who is not biologically related to be declared the boy's parent on the same legal footing as his birth mother and father. Amazing to me that The Gobe and Mail journalistically is so unabashedly on the side of the three would-be parents, treating the notion of "only two" basically as an idea so self-evidently arbitrary and anachronistic as to deserve only pity, not comment.
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 10:51 AM |Link
FROM THE U.K: "Liberal rabbis are to overturn one of the shibboleths of Jewish tradition by blessing mixed-faith couples in public for the first time. The Union of Liberal and Progressive Synagogues has given the go-ahead for such blessings in the synagogue, the Jewish Chronicle will report this week."
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 10:41 AM |Link
"They plans to set a scheme where the isolated mussels are put on a river bed to encourage 'group sex'".
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 10:38 AM |Link
MORE DOWNSHIFTING?: A growing number of people are leaving well-paid jobs and moving home to relieve stress, according to research published on Wednesday. Twelve million Europeans, mostly in well-paid, high-stress jobs and with young children, are downshifting -- taking a cut in salary or working fewer hours ... Every day 1,600 advertisements bombard Britons, the study says. This, combined with exposure to the internet, e-mails and mobile telephones and the "fragmentation" of the extended family, has pushed stress levels to breaking point ... "This is leading some to reassess what really matters to them -- is it to earn more and spend more or focus on family, relationships and other human and family values?" My sense is that this trend, or at least the discussion of what may be a trend, is further along in Europe and Australia than it is in the U.S., where we still pretty much want to work harder and do more. (As in: I wish I were less busy, so I could get more done.)
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 10:32 AM |Link
Tuesday, April 15, 2003
Why are sex diseases rising?:The number of people being diagnosed with sexually transmitted infections (STIs) is now at record levels ... "Our research shows young and older people are finding it difficult to maintain condom use once they are in a trusting relationship," says Dr Ingham. "Obviously, if there is a STI it can then be transmitted." More on this story here.
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 12:23 PM |Link
DEAR ABBY, MY LIVE-IN BOYFRIEND WON'T PROPOSE: "In June, I gave Brian one year to ask me to marry him. Here it is almost May, and he is no closer to proposing now than he was then. Am I being unreasonable to expect a serious commitment?"
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 12:12 PM |Link
Monday, April 14, 2003
"A California think tank has already warned that California is poised to experience an explosion of teen births, which would drive national teen birthrates up within five years."
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 5:18 PM |Link
A WEIRD TRAVEL SAGA, in yesterday�s NYT, written by a recently divorced dad who took his 18-year old son on a shoestring rafting trip in Alaska, to help alleviate his own guilt at breaking up the marriage. The story opens with the father and son lost on the Kanektok River, �without a phone or radio, without a guide and without the slightest bit of first-hand knowledge of the country we were in.� Dad says the son sulked and carped through the trip, but as the clouds parted and they sighted the Eskimo village that was their destination, the story ends with the son�s words :�Dad, we made it.�
posted by Elizabeth Marquardt
at 4:27 PM |Link
BUY SPERM ONLINE! Newsweek's business section this week has an article on the growth of online sperm banks:Add �daddy� to the ever-expanding list of stuff available online. Thanks to the Web, what were once intensely private transactions are now routine retail exchanges in an open marketplace where consumers shop for sperm much the way they shop for cars. And business is booming. Cappy Rothman, medical director of California Cryobank, the world�s largest sperm bank, estimates that Americans bought about $45 million worth of frozen sperm (and related services) on the Internet last year. That this article appeared in the "Enterprise" section (as opposed to an "Ethics" section) is culturally significant. I browsed a few of these websites a while ago. They are fascinating:Any mention of fathers is conspicuously absent. Indeed, the words "fathers," "fatherhood," or "dad" do not even appear on the sperm bank websites I visited. From their perspective, it is a benign neglect that makes business sense. Though they essentially market and sell "fathering" without the father, it still seems vulgar to be upfront about it. "Father-free babies!" is not nearly as appealing a concept as "Fat-free frozen yogurt!" ... And even the mothers want something more than sperm in a cup. The "Donor" sections of sperm bank websites are a bizarre mix of the anonymous and the personal. In addition to a laundry list of physical attributes (height, weight, eye color, blood type, etc.) and other vital stats (GPA and SAT scores), the donors answer essay questions about themselves, offering all of the insights of a personal ad ("I am easy-going, very likable, people do things for me, and I love the outdoors"). On Xytex's site, they even include baby pictures of the donors. And don't miss the "donor of the month," currently a 6'0" brown-haired (and balding) caucasian Christian who describes himself as "out-going, active, laid-back, stubborn" and says the he donated his sperm for "money" (which is by far the most common motive). Oh, and his favorite color is green and the celebrity he most resembles is Tom Cruise. As I looked through this catalog of "donor-dads," more and more I thought to myself, "This is not how it's supposed to happen." ... [S]omething seems amiss in our society when sperm banks are more likely to come up as the backdrop to a bad joke than as a subject of serious moral discussion. Some have described these children as "radically fatherless," which is true. But what's striking (but not surprising) is that many of these children still want to know their fathers.
posted by Tom Sylvester
at 3:06 PM |Link
Lots of heated arguing -- mostly, it seems about the clarity and meaning of the word "sanction" -- about the validity of the recent survey suggesting that half of Massachusetts citizens support legalizing gay marriage. It seems to me that the critics of the poll have a point, but only a small one, and their rhetoric is way too hot.
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 11:12 AM |Link
"Outlook grim for single moms," reports the Sacramento Bee. A new report predicts that the decline in teen childbearing will reverse itself in the next three years, partly due to economic factors. Also:Many of the poor single moms live with the fathers of their children, economist [Robert] Lerman said. But without marriage, the relationship usually doesn't promise them much in the way of long-term economic security."Cohabitation tends to involve a limited commitment," Lerman said. "It is not as clear as a forward-looking, investment-oriented approach" more common in married couples.
posted by Tom Sylvester
at 11:12 AM |Link
CAN YOU HAVE THREE PARENTS? Stanley Kurtz discusses slipperly slopes and same-sex marriage in light of a unique lawsuit in Canada.
posted by Tom Sylvester
at 10:07 AM |Link
Sunday, April 13, 2003
"A PLACE FOR RESCUING MARRIAGES":"The WinShape Marriage Retreat Centre, scheduled to open to the public this fall, is part of Chick-fil-A's WinShape Foundation, a charity branch of the fast-food restaurant chain that also provides foster homes for more than 100 children and scholarship money for dozens of Berry College students. Berry was founded in 1902 on Christian principles but is now open to students of all religions. The retreats are not cheap. They are expected to cost about $3,000 per couple for four days of intense counseling, complete with certified marriage therapists, chef-prepared meals and comfortable accommodations."
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 1:28 PM |Link
In a new Boston Globe/WBZ-TV poll, 50 percent supported legalizing gay and lesbian marriages, while 44 percent said they oppose it.
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 1:10 PM |Link
"For the first time, the John Paul II Pontifical Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family and the Shalom Hartman Institute of Jerusalem agreed to address jointly the subject of marriage and responsible procreation. The purpose of the meeting, held March 26-27 under the auspices of the Israeli Embassy to the Vatican, was to develop dialogue between Jews and Christians on the topic."
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 12:55 PM |Link
FROM THE DESERT NEWS:The researchers at Rutgers University in New Jersey believe the trend of living together is the main reason for the delay of marriage. Rutgers researchers are in the midst of a series of studies called "The State of Our Unions," about marriage in America. Their most recent survey, done by David Popenoe and Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, focuses on 25 to 33-year-old men. Popenoe and Whitehead discovered that "men can get many of the benefits of marriage without the commitment to marriage, or as they often point out, without exposure to the financial risks of divorce. Cohabitation gives men regular access to the domestic and sexual ministrations of a girlfriend while allowing them greater legal, social and psychological freedom." But, the authors add, the vast majority of men share the same aspirations women do, to someday marry and have a family.
posted by David Blankenhorn
at 12:51 PM |Link
|