Sorry Ricky Martin, but Women Shouldn't Create Single Parent Households--and You Shouldn't Either
August 21st, 2008 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families
I've long criticized the Single Motherhood by Choice movement for ignoring the importance of fathers and the two-parent family. Now singer Ricky Martin has decided to have motherless children. From Ricky Martin Father of Twin Boys Via Surrogate Mother (Associated Press, 8/20/08):
There won't be much "livin' la vida loca" for Ricky Martin these days -- he's now the father of twin boys.
The Latin superstar had the children via a surrogate mother, and the babies were born a few weeks ago, according to a statement from his representatives.
"The children, delivered via gestational surrogacy, are healthy and already under Ricky's full-time care," said the statement. "Ricky is elated to begin this new chapter in his life as a parent and will be spending the remainder of the year out of the public spotlight in order to spend time with his children."
A representative said there was no further information on the details of the children's birth.
Martin, 36, is a multiplatinum singer who is best known for English-language hits like "She Bangs!" and "Livin' la Vida Loca." In recent years, the Puerto Rican star has been active in charitable efforts, including the prevention of sexual exploitation of children.
It is nice to see a father being portrayed positively, as Martin is. And I can certainly understand his hesitance to have children through marriage, since the mother could divorce him and push him to the margins of his children's lives on her whim. Nevertheless, children need mothers just like they need fathers, and the two-parent family is what's best for kids.
I disagree with Martin's decision--children need both a mother and a father. There has been wide speculation that Martin is gay, which he denies. If he is gay, that changes the issue a bit.
Martin says, "I love women and sex. I am a real hot-blooded Puerto Rican, but have never been attracted by sex with a man."
To learn more about the problems with the Single Motherhood by Choice movement, see:
1) My co-authored column Are Single Mothers the 'New American Family?' (World Net Daily, 9/28/06)
2) My debate on Fox's nationally-syndicated Morning Show with Mike and Juliet -- to watch, click here.
3) My co-authored column Why Dads Matter (Houston Chronicle, 6/18/06)
4) My column Raising Boys Without Men: Lesbian Parents Good, Dads Bad (World Net Daily, 9/10/05)
"));
19 queries. 0.557 seconds.
August 21st, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Is it official? Is Ricky Martin gay?
I can't see why a straight man, especially one as attractive as RM, would go for something like this. Surely he could have found an attractive, traditional latina woman? Or maybe this is an extreme reaction to the marriage strike?
August 21st, 2008 at 12:36 pm
"Or maybe this is an extreme reaction to the marriage strike?"
Definitely. He wants kids but he KNOWS that if he even has sex with a woman she can pretty much rob him. He's rich and famous so he has much more to lose by getting married.
Regardless, no need to bring kids into it.
August 21st, 2008 at 12:42 pm
I can see why he went this route.
Ricky Martin is just the type of target women go after with the baby trap tactic. I give him kudos for deciding this and hope more fathers follow in his footsteps.
Why the hell would you want to have a baby with someone who can take away not only your children, but your identity as well.
On a personal note, I received a call yesterday saying I can go take the written and driving test to get my license back. By next week I will be able to drive down to the store all by myself LEGALLY and get some chips. Not bad for a 38 year old man. =/
August 21st, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Callum said:
"He's rich and famous so he has much more to lose by getting married."
Cough....Paul McCartney....Cough
MXY
August 21st, 2008 at 12:43 pm
I saw this story yesterday and wondered if Glenn would mention it.
Kudos for consistency. It's important we don't support, or even appear to support, the double standards that Feminism is so fond of.
Reasonable Equality. That's what we have to stand for. Absolute equality being unreasonable because men and women are simply built differently, and there are some areas of life where these differences are important. Just as long as we fight for what is fair for everyone, I'm onboard.
August 21st, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Simple answer: Ricky Martin is gay.
August 21st, 2008 at 1:06 pm
It's a well known "secret" that he is gay. Therefore, no way other than surrogate to have children. So Glenn, are you against all adoptions and surrogate children of gay parents as well since they do not have the appropriate parent figures?
August 21st, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Single fathers by choice are such a tiny fraction of the single parent by choice mania that we shouldn't even be wasting our breath or our time on this one. RM has the means and obviously the desire to do a good job raising his kids.
August 21st, 2008 at 1:26 pm
What is very obvious from all this debate about what it means to be a "couple" or a "family" is that America is still the very best social experiment on the planet.
There is no "tradition" anymore.
Let it all evolve!
If I want to marry my dog, is that a problem?
When you inhabit a country that has no true values, you get to experience the consequences of that dilemma.
It is really a gift, to live without any certainty about anything.
August 21st, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Actually, I agree that children need both parents but if this is a statement about the marriage strike till equality then Ricky could have made an immense splash by saying I did not want the court to allow my wife (if she left me) to take my children out of my life as well as as much money as she could get.
He needs to come clean about his rationalizations - for sure all these "I don't want to put up with a man" or "can't find a perfect man" women tell us all about their reasons.
August 21st, 2008 at 2:16 pm
"Are Single Mothers the 'New American Family?"
The plague of single motherhood is the most damaging social phenomenon this country has witnessed since its founding.
The plague of single motherhood is enabled, encouraged, and underwritten by government policies which were originally intended to help women who truly needed it, but have since been taken to such extremes of exploitation by state legislatures and state judiciaries, that these have become the CAUSE of the vast majority of single motherhood.
State governments, including agencies, and complicit legislatures and judiciaries and their incestuous relations with their cronies -- the private legal profession -- have turned attempts to help needy women into a virtual slave trade and theft-of-marital-assets business. And now that the word of these hazards has diffused to singe men guess what?
1. Nice, not system-gaming women are having a very difficult time finding husbands willing to marry and expose themselves to the risks of government abuse, and
2. Less nice women are raping and pillaging to get all the free cash benefits and slave ownership privileges accorded a "poor single mother".
State governments need to be reined in by large scale Federal intervention.
And a national Federal sting operation against the private legal "profession" which operates in the nation's family courts would be very well timed about now.
August 21st, 2008 at 2:17 pm
This isn't the first time we've heard of something like this going down. Michael Jackson had kids under very similar circumstances, and we all know what happened to him. So, compare and contrast.
Still, I side w/Steve K. We have to be consistent if we want to win the debate againts the Feminist Lobby. Whether Martin is indeed gay is irrelevant to the issue. Personally I do think he's gay, but again that's irrelevant.
As I said on the Single Mom Writer thread, we have to win the debate on the facts, and as Steve said, by being and staying consistent.
Also I commend Sacks for bein consistent as well.
Salaam
Mu
August 21st, 2008 at 2:20 pm
James D. Says:
August 21st, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Actually, I agree that children need both parents but if this is a statement about the marriage strike till equality then Ricky could have made an immense splash by saying I did not want the court to allow my wife (if she left me) to take my children out of my life as well as as much money as she could get.
___________________________________________________________________
I believe he is gay. Anyone know of any ex-girlfriends? He is rich, famous and at age 36 there should be some- somewhere in his past..
August 21st, 2008 at 2:58 pm
AnonymousPamphleteer
"And now that the word of these hazards has diffused to singe men guess what?"
Let me guess, single father families will be the fastest growing household demographic group. Wait, they all ready are. It’s a pity really. I would have never guessed that if given the chance, so many adults would willing destroy their families it’s incredible. Then again, I had a strong feeling that Starbucks had a bad business model and eventually I was proven correct. The problem is that the government won’t come in and save Starbucks but will come in and band aid over the single parenthood results. Wonder what would happen if we took the incentives away?
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/op-eds-&-columns/op-eds-&-columns/fast-facts-for-father-s-day:-lone-father-families-and-economic-insecurity/
All the best,
August 21st, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Well, it is possible that Martin did not opt for marriage because it make lower his appeal to his female fan base. That might sound shallow, but some people have been known to do things like that. Whatever Martin's reasons for going with a surrogate, he is going to wish there was another parent there pretty soon. One kid is tough enough to handle. Two at the same age is harder.
August 21st, 2008 at 3:15 pm
re: Whatever Martin's reasons for going with a surrogate, he is going to wish there was another parent there pretty soon.
...Martin can hire all the people he wants to help with these children. Didn't Madonna admit to never having changed a diaper after having two children? These celebrities live in a different world than the rest of us...
August 21st, 2008 at 3:37 pm
I'd like to spice this thread up a bit by supporting Martin per se .
The idea that a man should always have a child with a permanent female partner is utopian and ignores the huge risk of losing contact whilst being saddled with child support , which we all know about . Until this risk recedes to the point of negligibility , men with money are probably better off acting like Martin than playing mummies and daddies . The risk that Martin and anybody else would take is that the mother would renege on the deal - in that case the law should say the father is not liable either to pay her fee or support a child he may not see .
Id also like to say I have no problem with lesbians or even straight women getting inseminated with clinic donor sperm . The guy involved gets paid £15 or thereabouts for masturbating into a plastic pot , which is not a bad deal on its own merit , and the women have to stand or fall on their own resources without using a man as an invisible wallet .
The ideal option for those without a permanent opposite sex partner , of course , is to enter into a friendly co-parenting relationship .
August 21st, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Gay or not, I would have to agree with Ricky Martin here. Why give anyone the power to unleash the Family Courts on you, to rob of you of your health, wealth, and freedom?
Marriage Strike + Single Fatherhood via Surrigate Technology = Collapse of the Gynocracy.
I would not be surprised if more and more straight men start taking this approach.
August 21st, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Further proof that Glenn is a female hating misogynist who wants to go back to the 50's and keep women barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen....
oh WAIT A MINUTE this isn't about a woman........ oh my how WILL the feminists find fault with this...... (and they will find SOMETHING)
btw agree completely with Glenn on his points.
and IAN UK you say: The guy involved gets paid £15 or thereabouts for masturbating into a plastic pot , which is not a bad deal on its own merit , and the women have to stand or fall on their own resources without using a man as an invisible wallet
sorry bloke but there are more and more cases of men being held accountable for child support for masturbating into that cup and who knows what the future will bring. i for one would never want that risk out there. Remember they can come after you for support DECADES LATER!! - if a woman wants a baby without a father (her sexual preference doesnt matter in the least) let her conjure one up...... I thought women didn't need men well then make your baby without one.......
August 21st, 2008 at 4:08 pm
IanUK says: "Id also like to say I have no problem with lesbians or even straight women getting inseminated with clinic donor sperm . The guy involved gets paid £15 or thereabouts for masturbating into a plastic pot , which is not a bad deal on its own merit , and the women have to stand or fall on their own resources without using a man as an invisible wallet . "
PK responds: Yeah yeah yeah. We keep hearing that, when all the stars align and crystals line up that there's no harm in single career women having sperm bank babies until... they go out and demand that the state provide them with "free" healthcare and daycare among other goodies.
Haven't we been down this road before? We heard 30 years ago that after women got to earn more money, then they wouldn't have an excuse to demand that men continue to be breadwinners and that they would be "independent" and wouldn't need men anymore. Oh, except for demanding a fascist police state to track down "deadbeats" and demand welfare benefits because "single mothers" need help lest the children in their care starve.
In addition, whenever men try to walk away from unwanted bastard children we hear the argument: "A child needs BOTH parents especially for support!"
Someone such as Ricky Martin or Hollywood celebs can afford to beat the system but most people can't.
August 21st, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Polish Knight:
Here are typical costs. It sure seems cheaper than the marriage->divorce->alimony mill to me:
http://www.becomeparents.com/Fees--and--Costs.php
August 21st, 2008 at 4:39 pm
I agree. Single parenthood by choice is bad. Not only is it bad for the children, but it further divides the sexes into opposite teams. The viewpoint that men and women should work together is fading and more and more the two are competing against each other.
August 21st, 2008 at 4:46 pm
I think there is a distinction between clinic donors and private ones . As far as i know even the wacko feminists in the UK have no plans to make clinic donors liable .
Private donors are on their own and depend on the mother staying off their back and off welfare .
August 21st, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Being born to parents who are unmarried doesn't mean the child is fatherless. There are married fathers and mothers who are emotionally absent from their children. As long as he is a good father, that's all that matters.
August 21st, 2008 at 6:49 pm
LorMarie -- "As long as he is a good father, that's all that matters."
No, what matters is how much of a totalitarian Sh*tstem does he have to fight to try to be a good father?
I do really like your remark about "emotional absence."
Please write more about this.
August 21st, 2008 at 6:52 pm
No, what matters is how much of a totalitarian Sh*tstem does he have to fight to try to be a good father?--Roy
I should also add that the mother must allow him to be a good father. Contrary to popular belief, a woman wasn't meant to do it alone.
August 21st, 2008 at 7:15 pm
Considering the ease with which women these days can steal us men's children from us in divorce court and quickly relegate us men to once every two weeks visitor, I see absolutely nothing wrong with what Ricky Martin did. In fact, it appears to me that he may be smarter than the average bear!
Well done Ricky Martin!
August 21st, 2008 at 9:08 pm
I'm with PK on this one - I reckon it's pretty clear he's gay.
I read this portion of Glenn's statement: "And I can certainly understand his hesitance to have children through marriage, since the mother could divorce him and push him to the margins of his children's lives on her whim."
and thought - yeah, I don't think the issue is with him being in a relationship as opposed to being in one with a woman.
Also, I think most of you men should be ashamed of yourselves. You all bitch about how evil women keep good fathers from their children and how bad it is when women choose to have children without a father, then applaud a man who chooses to have children without a mother.
hy·poc·ri·sy
1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'll just sit here and wait for torrent of abuse that is clearly headed my way.
August 21st, 2008 at 9:21 pm
I don't think we are applauding Mr. Martin for having a child minus a mother here so much as we're saying we understand the mindset. It's still not the IDEAL in that the child knows both a mother and father, but given what happens in terms of divorce in this country we can understand.
But here's the sad thing. He was still running a huge risk if the mother knew who he was. She could have refused to hand the child over at the appointed time. Even more, she could have applied for child support and Mr. Martin would still be obliged to pay. That sort of case could go for years before there was a conclusion of any way, shape or form.
August 21st, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Adopt, adopt, adopt, adopt..................................ADOPT!!!!
August 21st, 2008 at 9:26 pm
If Ricky Martin had married a woman, had kids with her, divorced her, taken her to the cleaners, took custoday of the children, attached child support and lifetime alimony on her, and not allowed her to see the children .... then and only then would be hypocrites.
Applauding a man for having kids without a female parent By Design is not the same. Also, go easy on the shaming language.
August 21st, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Adopt, adopt, adopt, adopt..................................ADOPT!!!!--Kelly M. Bray
Kelly,
demanding that people adopt (instead of having biological children) is similar to a religious fundamentalist demanding that people abstain from alcohol because he/she believes it's a sin. Don't get me wrong, adoption is a wonderful thing and I hope to do it someday. At the same time, I plan to have a biological child (not married and don't want to be). I can't speak for others, but adopting a child will not cancel out the desire for one biologically related to me.
At the same time, having a biological child will not cancel out my desire to adopt. Thus, Angelina Jolie is my hero, LOL. You may champion adoption, but there are people in my life who ask, "Why on earth would you adopt"? "Get with the program and have your own kids?" In other words, some people think it's morally wrong not to reproduce. To those on both sides I say to live your life, and I will live mine. Statistics should not decide the fate of either of us.
August 21st, 2008 at 10:29 pm
First, he is not straight. Not self respecting hetero male would have a child that way.
Money can't buy him love. But it did buy him a carrier.
I doubt he will be parading the kids around like other celebs do though.
August 21st, 2008 at 10:33 pm
Am I the only one who refuses to believe that Ricky Martin is gay?
August 21st, 2008 at 10:40 pm
LorMarie Says:
August 21st, 2008 at 10:33 pm
Am I the only one who refuses to believe that Ricky Martin is gay?
This is commonly known as 'wishful thinking' hahaha.
August 21st, 2008 at 11:34 pm
I haven't seen ant reason to think he's gay. As for the "lack" of girlfriends...well, some guys' careers depend on "wishful thinking" teenage girls for their income, so there's that. Also, some people might not like their lives paraded around in the tabloids, and stay under the radar.
I suspect the assertion he's gay comes from the "pretty boy" or feminine features he has.
August 22nd, 2008 at 12:30 am
# David Says:
August 21st, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Also, go easy on the shaming language.
Interesting David. Having been a regular reader of this and many other men's rights sites for quite a while now, the basic gist is to call out people who abuse or step on... well... men's rights. But when I call out people on here for acting in a hypocritical manner, all of a sudden it's 'shaming language'.
August 22nd, 2008 at 12:33 am
Factory
I'm with you on this one.
Part of the anti male rhetoric is that any man who does not smell bad and wear a foot long beard is participating in a homosexual lifestyle. If they are clean shaven and well spoken they must be participating in the homosexual lifestyle (because we all know that men are brutes), this paints us into a box. It’s similar to the ‘if you speak too well you must not be black or trying to be white’ game. He (or she) who frames the rules wins the game.
All the best
August 22nd, 2008 at 12:47 am
Mark
“I think most of you men should be ashamed of yourselves. You all bitch about how evil women keep good fathers from their children and how bad it is when women choose to have children without a father, then applaud a man who chooses to have children without a mother.”
I see your point, just not sure if that is the dynamic here. Several post that I have read skipped the entire issue of single parent by choice. They went straight to the ‘protect yourself from being harmed by someone looking to take your children and cash in’. I have yet to hear posters celebrating the single parent by choice. However, many are concerned about the risks of having a child with someone who cares little about the family, father or kids for that matter.
I do agree that being a hypocrite would be revealing.
All the best
August 22nd, 2008 at 2:47 am
What's the deal with young men these days growing those "toothbrush beards"? It looks terrible. Ditto for those skinny goatees I see cropping up.
August 22nd, 2008 at 3:11 am
I agree that it is not good for men to deliberately create single-father households, any more than it is for women to deliberately choose to be single mothers.
I also agree that we need to avoid going down the feminist road of creating double standards.
But having said that, there is never going to be anywhere near as many men able to make the choice to become single parents as there are women. So it is never going to be as big a social problem.
August 22nd, 2008 at 3:15 am
Norman,
I agree that these kinds of narrow strips of hair look ugly.
I have a goatee, though I guess it's thick enough.
August 22nd, 2008 at 3:22 am
"I disagree with Martin's decision--children need both a mother and a father. There has been wide speculation that Martin is gay, which he denies. If he is gay, that changes the issue a bit."
Actually, it shouldn't change things at all. If children want a mother and a father, the desire of gay couples to have children doesn't change this.
There is not really any difference between asking a single man to miss out on having children in order to avoid depriving children of having a mother and a father, and asking gay couples to make the same decision.
The only (possible) exception is where gay couples can work out an agreement with another man or woman that would enable the child to have a relationship with both biological parents.
August 22nd, 2008 at 4:47 am
This guy, or any other guy, or girl for that matter, is in the wrong. However, the whole gay issue was brought up because you can't have a mom and a dad, if there's two "Steves" or two "Eves", and parenthood is not something they should be denied.
I'll agree with that statement too. It's not the ideal for kids, but it's a balance between the rights of the child (taken care of properly), and the rights of the parent (to be so if he/she chooses.
My opinion: two parents are better than one, and that's a simple truth. This is just as bad as career women getting knocked up by strangers to cure the baby rabies.
August 22nd, 2008 at 4:48 am
Oh, and I have a "soul patch"...wanna make somethin' of it? :)
August 22nd, 2008 at 5:26 am
I dont see a problem with this- how else is a gay bloke supposed to have kids? I guess he could have adopted, but lets face it, a kid is better off with only a dad than only a mom, especially when the dad is rolling in greenbacks.
August 22nd, 2008 at 5:50 am
Lets not confuse a single father with a single mother. According to the research, compared to a two parent home, a single dad is only slightly worse, whereas a single mother is much, much worse.
There are two very big upsides to this story. In another topic someone was complaining, quite rightly, that feminists seem incapable of placing themselves in our place. Well, the more men like Ricky Martin there are out there the more opportunities feminists will have to think “Gee, it feels kinda bad to be treated like the redundant parent.” Also, with any luck they will take this as a threat on the part of rich men to go off and have children that wont be influenced by a female presence to become Clintons or Obamas. In other words they will realize that if they can attempt to raise kids by themselves to teach them feminist values, the rich males can raise kids by themselves in order to teach them patriarchal values.
And no, kids don’t need both a mom and a dad. To the best of my knowledge kids raised by gays and lesbians are as well adjusted as those raised by straight couples, hence lesbian couples prove that you don’t need a dad and gay couples prove that you don’t need a mom. If anyone has any research showing children raised by gays and lesbians are more messed up, id like to see it. And please, no “anecdotal evidence.”
August 22nd, 2008 at 6:17 am
Mark wrote….
“Also, I think most of you men should be ashamed of yourselves.”
We are men, after all.
“You all bitch about how evil women keep good fathers from their children …”
Ricky Martin isn’t keeping anyone from anything- he apparently has a deal with this woman, its not like he’s sneaking off in the middle of the night and then going for sole custody, so the two situations are not comparable.
“and how bad it is when women choose to have children without a father, “
That’s because a single mother places the kids at far greater risk than a single father does.
“hy•poc•ri•sy
1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.”
This definition of hypocrisy is irrelevant to the point you are trying to make as it is possible to have the view that Martin isn’t doing something so terrible and still be concerned primarily with the kid’s welfare, hence demonstrating a “virtuous character.”
Go Ricky, go, but for Gods sake admit you’re gay already- a closet is no place to raise a baby.
David wrote…
“Marriage Strike + Single Fatherhood via Surrigate Technology = Collapse of the Gynocracy.”
Oh, crap, don’t you hate it when you write several paragraphs only to find out someone else has already put it that succinctly? I couldn’t have put it better myself, in fact, I didn’t.
“I would not be surprised if more and more straight men start taking this approach.”
I say this in all seriousness, since i hit my mid 30s a few years ago it has often occurred to me that if I start getting all paternal in my mid forties I will either hire a surrogate or adopt by myself. It’s way too much of an emotional risk to have children that could be snatched away at any minute because mamma decides she needs a new bag. This of course, is assuming the feminists don’t make all these options illegal for men.
August 22nd, 2008 at 10:28 am
Norman L. Says:
August 22nd, 2008 at 2:47 am
What's the deal with young men these days growing those "toothbrush beards"? It looks terrible. Ditto for those skinny goatees I see cropping up.
Why do I do it? cause the chicks dig it ;) (wanted to give the feminists something to slam me on - have at it!)
August 22nd, 2008 at 11:22 am
Maybe Mark and Glenn have a point
Mark says: "Also, I think most of you men should be ashamed of yourselves. You all bitch about how evil women keep good fathers from their children and how bad it is when women choose to have children without a father, then applaud a man who chooses to have children without a mother."
PK responds: Let's assume for the sake of argument that Ricky Martin isn't gay (which is possible, I haven't heard anything definitive on that yet) and is just engaging in a radical marriage strike.
What is abhorrant about the single mother by choice movement is that it's due to a failure on the women's part to "find" a man carried over into their parental relationships. Rather than rise to the modern challenge of _really_ finding someone and asking men out rather than waiting for a prince to ride up to their castle, they wind up turning 40 without even questioning themselves. They are lazy, at best, and this is why they are single and childless.
Ricky is in a similar position, though. Most men can't just walk into a bar or even on the street and be mobbed by beautiful, decent members of the opposite sex willing to have sex with him or marry him. He could have gone overseas or found a wonderful latina to marry. He could have easily gotten a prenup. Hell, I think he should get a dowry as well if he's worried. I don't buy into the "marriage strike" when men are aware of the dangers and account for them. I only accept it as a emotional reaction by men in leau of jumping into danger without thinking first.
THAT said... What Ricky is doing is a pretty powerful statement to many women and shows that what's good for the goose, etc. Sometimes people ONLY understand tit-for-tat and this is better than Ricky just getting married to a golddigger and hoping for the best.
August 22nd, 2008 at 12:12 pm
PK -- "They (women) are lazy, at best, and this is why they are single and childless."
I believe that is a categorical condemnation of women over a certain age, who are unfortunately unwedded due to no choices they made , and now they are childless.
You should be censored for suggesting that their choices resulted in where they are in life.
Is it still legal to call women, as a class, "lazy?"
I have known many hard-working women.
How many times a day do you have to answer a phone?
August 22nd, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Interesting David. Having been a regular reader of this and many other men's rights sites for quite a while now, the basic gist is to call out people who abuse or step on... well... men's rights. But when I call out people on here for acting in a hypocritical manner, all of a sudden it's 'shaming language'.
Hi Mark,
Sorry I didn't mean to personally insult you like that. We differ on our positions on this one issue, but you are defending a legitimate intellectual position in your argument. I take that last sentence back regarding use of shaming language.
David
August 22nd, 2008 at 1:13 pm
wow.
what is with the shaming language going on here.
calling him 'gay', saying no real man would have children like that, etc.
i'd expect that from others but come on lets hold ourselves to a higher standard. no ad homin attacks, no character assassination, none of that.
lets talk about issues and facts.
are the kids going to get the best possible upbringing. if the best possible is to have a loving mother and a loving father, then the answer is no.
are the kids going to be loved and raised to the best of his ability. one would hope so.
now onto the fact that 'no real man would have kids like that' or 'only a gay man would have kids that way'.
how is this any different than a woman buying sperm at a sperm bank? it is his sperm in another woman vs a random guys sperm in herself. these are the exact same situations but with reversed genders.
now there are many reasons for him to go this way than to get married or have the kid with a gf.
he retains all parental rights. he doesn't have to worry about being divorced and the child support not going to the kids.
-------
please can we get above the childishness of 'gay', 'not a real man', etc.
August 22nd, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Real Men and Real Women and The Clone Wars
preda says: "calling him 'gay', saying no real man would have children like that, etc."
PK responds: preda, I don't think we meant to point these out as an ad-hominem attack but rather to put things into context. Few heterosexual men are interested in doing this and most who do turn out to be gay so Ricky Martin's sexuality is an issue. If "real" or heterosexual men are not going for this, then it's largely moot. Homosexuals have no choice than to use surrogates or sperm banks to have a child.
I haven't had this conversation with normal men, but it appears that most of them consider children to be a derivative of marriage and relationships with women rather than the primary purpose of it. Many men may want children but they want them as part of a family. I have NEVER heard of a male "biological clock ticker" marrying a woman they find distasteful just to have children or going for a surrogate although I suppose it's possible.
So in that regard, it's useful to consider that we are looking at things from a different context than women: Women sometimes want children more than heterosexual relationships with men. This is interesting because, in the past, women regarded children as a burden and that's still present in much feminist rhetoric even as women are now obsessed with having babies and gays with marriage. Has someone informed them that feminists say they are supposed to NOT want these things?
So it's rather amusing for me to hear feminists wail on and on about how women suffer due to childbirth and should get medals for risking death even as they complain that men and society don't support single mothers. Well, if you think childbirth is so awful then... don't go through with it! Bluff, called.
I find the notion of single parenthood by choice to be very weird. The concept of parenting is to share one's biological gametes with another person and produce UNIQUE offspring. Having a child, by oneself, without another partner is like getting a clone and with a surrogae, a clone that's half contanimated with someone else's material. Cloning is the ultimate form of selfishness since it's about propogating oneself, literally, through the ages without mixing with the rest of society. Imagine... if we were a society made up of people who were absolutely no different than 50,000 years ago.
August 22nd, 2008 at 2:43 pm
not even getting into the single parent by choice, which i'm not sure how i feel about that:
Few heterosexual men are interested in doing this and most who do turn out to be gay so Ricky Martin's sexuality is an issue. If "real" or heterosexual men are not going for this, then it's largely moot. Homosexuals have no choice than to use surrogates or sperm banks to have a child.
so all the 'families' who have used surrogate mothers are what now? if you marry a girl and find out she has defective plumbing, you don't try to get a surrogate mother? hell as a straight male i have no choice but to use a sperm bank if i want my genetic code passed on to the next generation.
there are 3 ways to start a family that I know of. have a bio child, adoption, surrogacy(donated sperm father/bank, donated eggs mother/surrogate). why should we see one method biological child be seen as 'better' or more 'right' than the other too?
also, as a male, i have always wanted kids. if females can have a clock ticking, why can't i? albeit if i don't find someone special to spend my life with, would it be 'wrong' of me to go and apopt kids and raise them as my own? and if thats ok what about using donated sperm in a surragate, would that be wrong then?
i'm in the mras for equality. if woman have those choices i don't want to remove the choices from them, i want comparable ones to be given to males.
August 22nd, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Preda, I don't think anyone here was saying that single parents shouldn't be allowed to adopt or even have children on their own but were merely debating the social merits of doing so.
I know I was a bit loose in my language by saying that homosexuals have "no choice" but to use a surrogate but I hoped that the context implied that was in having a child of their own gametes and wasn't relevent (directly) to infertile couples using adoption, surrogates, etc. since we're talking about the merits of single parenthood by choice.
For the record, FYI, I don't think single parenthood by choice is automatically bad in particular, extreme situations and this is probably one of them. If a parent has a ton o' money then there's no harm. The problem is that single parenthood has created a public health issue as millions of children are born seemingly into well-to-do homes and the parents cry afterwards that they have financial problems (and then demand democrats pass new socialist spending programs.)
In addition, a pattern of single parenting shows that social relations between the sexes is amazingly ill and needs to be addressed. Nature didn't create the two parent family by accident. It was meant to pool resources and to provide a balanced environment for children.
August 22nd, 2008 at 3:39 pm
"he must be gay", "no heterosexual will do that". thats discussing the social merits of surragacy?
and i still don't see how it changes the issue if he is straight/gay born a woman etc.
if a woman can buy sperm, why can't i buy eggs and the stuff attached to it?
-----------------------
but on to the single parent by choice. the more i think about it, the more i know i shouldn't dictate what other people do with their lives.
just because billy and susies are opposite sex doesn't give them any more right to have a kid than a gay couple, single parent home, etc.
i will definitely say that a child is best in a two person loving family with both a loving father and a loving mother.
aside from that, i don't think i can tell someone else how to spend their time or their money.
i also don't think it is up to me to fix all of society woes. or that i know what is best for society. whats to say a two parent household is best? why not a 4 parent. 1 husband 3 wives. more income, more people to take care of the babies, etc.
::shrugs::
i dunno.
August 22nd, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Guys, I don't know if this is true but I heard that statistics now show 55% of kids (I don't know what age-cutoff they are using) now live in single-mother homes. By either out of wedlock birth, or later by divorce. Is this true?
If so, we are the verge of a massive social experiment. One where the Father has a now "higher-than-even" probability to get hosed.
August 22nd, 2008 at 5:16 pm
It doesn't matter how much money Ricky Martin (or any single parent) has. The end result is that his twin boys will have everything that $$$ can buy except for a mother. That will leave a hole in their lives that no amount of $$$ can fill or repair. It is no different than when single women make the same choice.
August 22nd, 2008 at 5:42 pm
A hole in their "hearts" or a hole in their pockets; which is worse for the kids?
(since a lot of child support goes to support the divorced/single mom's lifestyle, and not towards that kids present needs and/or future inheritance / college funds)
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:59 am
Mark says "Also, I think most of you men should be ashamed of yourselves. You all bitch about how evil women keep good fathers from their children and how bad it is when women choose to have children without a father, then applaud a man who chooses to have children without a mother."
Steady on there Mark. Although I agree to a point, it is not quite as black-and-white as that.
The difference between single men and single women today is that men have far more legitimate reasons to choose to remain single, including avoiding the unjust anti-male family law system as well as other feminist excesses. Whereas women don't have the same excuses to avoid relationships.
Most single women today are largely single because they have driven men away through their excessive and unreasonable demands.
So for that reason, I would argue that single women are more to blame for their own predicament than single men. So maybe we should be more understanding of single men choosing to have children than single women who do.
Mark, you may need to get down off your high horse and realise that the hypocrisy is not quite as rank as you might think.
August 23rd, 2008 at 11:22 am
I don't know if Ricky Martin is gay or not, and really don't care. I'm not in his target audience, and his orientation doesn't affect me in the slightest.
Ricky Martin is not a "mens rights activist", and probably isn't aware of our existance. As far as him deciding to go the single parent route, he's in a far different situation that most of us, to start with, that has both an increased risk of being taken to the cleaners in family court. Whle he would certainly have the resources to defend himself, the only sure way for him to end up with custody is to marry a train wreck, which is self defeating. I'm sure he considers outcomes like Paul McCartney's and Alec Baldwin's and John Cleese's in his decision.
That being said, it's sad that he has to forgo a two parent family to avoid an inevitable, bitter, public disaster.
I can only surmise the caliber of women that he meets on a regular basis. Probably most can't get over the celebrity and the wealth long enough to be themselves. I would guess that most that would be his social and financial peers come across as ruthless as well. Maybe he has enough of his own peers that are sick of having a pampered, stay-at-home-alcoholic entitlement princesses in their lives that he's decided to stay away from marriage, which is, likely a big cultural break for him.
Or, maybe he is gay, and is trying to keep the details out of the public eye for personal and business reasons.
Whatever the case, I'm sure that he's made this decision carefuly, and on the advice of competent legal counsel, decided to go this route. It certainly doesn't seem to be an ill conceived (sorry!) moment of vanity, and he doen't go on about how empowering it is, or discusses his indifference and marginalization of the other parent. He doen't go on about how liberated he is, etc. He didn't have a 'one night stand' and decide that, without the other parent's permission and consent, he's going to keep the result. He found a person who entered into the agreement with full knowledge of the intended result. This is in stark contrast with most of the single moms by choice who are doing this out of pure vanity.
He's also not demanding the state subsidize his decision, and he's not going after the other parent for support. He's not out stating that he couldn't find an acceptable mate, or that women are irresponsible, violent, etc.
It's sad that he's had to chose this route - children are far better off with both parents. Sometimes the situation is what it is, and for Mr Martin to wait until the legal system holds women accountable, and considers men to be presumably competant parents, I understand his decision.
While we're on the hipocracy thing, I would like to point out that I'm a single (custodial) father. I chose to get divorced from an abusive ex. I ended up with custody, and I chose to fight for both primary possession, and at the advice of counselors, teachers, family members, principals, CPS case workers and many others, to minimize the destructive, unsafe and abusive contact with their mother as much as possible. I have also chosen to remain single. I will not ever co-habitate again, as much as I miss the company. I don't receive any support from the other parent (dispite a minimal order for such), and I'm not subsidized by the state. I do it all myself.
I think for all of their statistical minority, single father families do far better than single mother ones. So there. Nyah.
The short answer - I don't fully agree with his decision, but the vast difference between how men and women are treated in court and by society make this a considerably different issue from the deliberate single mother family situation.
August 23rd, 2008 at 10:17 pm
If he is gay I have not seen any partner, which with his profile would have come out in the wash. We all know how quickly the media would have found out who his "lover" is.
Maybe he just buys the services of a lady, he has the money. Also there are many men out there married with children that are either bi or gay but we dont query there sexuality.
Sorry guys life is not black and white but rather shades of grey.
Just my thoughts
August 26th, 2008 at 2:01 am
Glen, of course I don't agree with you again. You go on and on about the importance of fathers, how impotant is a father to a child that is being beaten and/or molested by his/her very important father? Yea and of course we can't forget the very important two-parent family, despite the fact that "very important father", beats the hell out of mommy every night, comes home drunk (if he comes home at all) and beats and/or sexually abuses his children. Yea, that's the kind of Dad I would like to have. What child would want a single Dad/Mom that loves me and gives me all I could ever need when I could have a two-parent family with a Daddy that uses me as his puching bag and sex toy.
August 26th, 2008 at 2:16 am
Glen, do you have kids? I'm telling you, your comments scare the hell out of me. Two-parent families are whats best for kids? Are you kidding me? As long as "Daddy" is part of the two-parent family, its ok for him to be an alcoholic, drug addict, woman/child abuser, child molester and/or rapist or any other criminal? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
I'm sure Alicia Keyes, Usher, Carl Edwards, Michael Phelps and any other child that were raised by their MOTHER'S ONLY, would have to disagree with you.
OMG.
August 26th, 2008 at 2:48 am
Offended Dad, Play your sad song all you want. I don't know your story and you don't know mine but I would like to ask you where you get your "I think for all of their statistical minority, single father families do far better than single mother ones." information from.
If this little tidbit is a statistical fact, then can you please tell me what the statistics are with regard to the number of single father families compared to single mother families.
Who makes the most money out of mommies and daddies? What is the number of Dead Beat Dads compared to Dead Beat Moms? You ever supported a 15 year old son, on $41 a week? Dead Beat Dad spends more than that on his cigarette addiction each week.
Dead Beat Dad goes out and has 4 more kids, hasn't paid any support since November of last year, but he has a boat, a new dodge durango, nice clothes, lives with his mommy, has no mortgage, no light bill, no grocery bill, no phone bill, (except for his cell phone of course), goes and stays in motels each week, but for some reason can't come up with that $41 a week child support payment. Oh yea, Mommy just got done paying over $10,000 for braces for the two boys he has with Mommy #1 (that's me). Didn't pay one red cent towards any of the high school graduation expensens for our son that just graduated from high school, but was mad because he had to sit in the stands and not on the field for the ceremony, oh yea, never mind the fact that Mommy (that's me) spent over $150.00 on food, drinks and graduation cake for OUR SON, even though he brought his other THREE boys from his second marriage, and while I was running around trying to get everything set up, all he kept asking was, can my I feed my three boys, even though, he didn't offer to help pay for a dam thing, and of course the one thing I told him he could bring, when he asked if he could bring anything, and I said yea, how about stopping and picking up a few balloons for us to relase when they announce his name, oh no, guess what Daddy fogot to pick up the ballons, (only fifteen minutes) had passed between the conversation and the time he showed up, but Daddy felt I disrespected him as Joshua's father. Well Mommy paid for eveything, Mommy's paid for all the schooling, attended all the functions, took care of and supported while "the sperm donor" (what my son refers to him as) does nothing but feels I should bow down and kiss his feet.
Sperm Donor does none of the work but wants all the glory and praise, imagine that.
August 27th, 2008 at 9:49 am
Rhonda--There's a problem with your IP address for some reason and some of your comments apparently aren't getting posted while others are. I emailed you twice before and it bounced (it says your mailbox is full). Please email me from a functional email address and I'll see if we can figure out what is going on.--GS
September 19th, 2008 at 10:30 am
for paradise poker...
microscopy,pastors verbalize:Doberman arbitrating:blew ...
January 5th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
[...] The CNN article cites Ricky Martin as an example. I discussed Martin in my blog post Sorry Ricky Martin, but Women Shouldn't Create Single Parent Households–and You Shouldn&... [...]