Media Unfairly Stereotypes Dads

**Tyrael** · 1st-April-2009

Media Unfairly Stereotypes Dads

The image of fathers and fatherhood has taken a beating over the past several decades, and the media has been part of the problem. While there has been some improvement in the past few years, fathers are still frequently unfairly stereotyped.For example, in April the Council on Contemporary Families issued a report on men and housework. CNN’s headline to the story was typical of most media-- "Report: Men still not pulling weight on chores.”

In reality, studies which account for the total amount of work that husbands and wives contribute to their households--including housework, child care, and employment--confirm that men contribute at least as much to their families as women do. What the CCF study actually said was that the amount of child care fathers provide has tripled over the past four decades, and the amount of housework men do has doubled. Moreover, men have accomplished this in an era where the average workweek has significantly expanded. The papers reporting the story barely noticed.

Ex-NBA Player Jason Caffey was widely vilified in April for being behind in his child support. Caffey had paid over 90% of what he was ordered to pay, but fell behind when his post-career income dropped, and was threatened with jail. Neither CNN commentator Nancy Grace nor Caffey’s other critics stopped to ponder the absurdity of calling a father who had already paid millions of dollars in child support a "deadbeat dad."

Similarly, in April Chandra Myers made national headlines when she took the unusual step of suing New York bakery worker Robert Sean Myers’ employers Sara Lee Bakeries and Bimbo Bakeries for allegedly failing to garnish his wages. Yet while Robert was labeled a “deadbeat dad,” the media didn’t even notice that a court had obligated Myers to pay $2,000 a month in child support for one child--on an income of only $1,600 a month.

USA Today financial columnist Sandra Block recently explained that widows receive significantly more social security benefits if their husbands delay retirement. She could have written, “Men, we know your wives and children appreciate the sacrifices you’ve made as family breadwinner, and delaying retirement will help ensure your loved ones are provided for.” Instead, Block wrote:

“If you want to make up for all the times you came home with beer on your breath, left your socks on the bathroom floor or gave your wife a DustBuster for Valentine's Day, hold off on filing for your Social Security benefits.”

She then adds, with some understatement, “Many men who are eager to retire may chafe at this suggestion.” You think?

In 2002, Clara Harris repeatedly ran over her husband David as his daughter begged Clara not to kill her father. She recently filed a suit against her former attorney, triggering a round of media reports on her case. Media outlets consistently referred to David simply as “Cheating Husband” or “Cheating Spouse.” At one point, 233 of the 354 news stories indexed on Google News, referred to David Harris as Clara Harris’ “cheating husband.” If an unfaithful woman was murdered by her husband, it’s doubtful that newspapers would disparage this victim of domestic violence by referring to her simply as “cheating wife.”

The reporting of the Britney Spears-Kevin Federline child custody battle also had some low points. Many headlines were similar to Yahoo News’ “Court awards Spears' kids to K-Fed.” Funny, we thought "Spears' kids" had two parents, not just one.

Research shows that dads matter. The rates of the four major youth pathologies--teen pregnancy, teen drug abuse, school dropouts and juvenile crime--are tightly correlated with fatherlessness, often more so than with any other socioeconomic factor.

The public portrayal of fathers is fairer now than it was a few years ago, and much fairer than it was during the 1980s and 1990s. Still, too much of the media reflexively buys into unfair, destructive stereotypes of dads as slackers, deadbeats, deserters, and louts.

This column first appeared in the Orange County Register (6/13/08).
Jeffery M. Leving is the Chairman of the Illinois Council on Responsible Fatherhood. His website is www.dadsrights.com.

Glenn Sacks’ columns on men's and fathers' issues have appeared in dozens of the largest newspapers in the United States. He invites readers to visit his website at www.GlennSacks.com.

Article link

**shaazam** · 2nd-April-2009

the media is the propaganda arm of the feminit dogma in the West

it is staffed by politically correct feminits and manginas so what is so surprising about their predictable "wimyn's studies" blurbs

fortunately the current international financial crisis will force hitherto supported feminit propaganda to be questioned and eventually rejected for the gibbering claptrap that it is

**musicman.2** · 2nd-April-2009

Women barely make any sacrifices at all (or not as many as the men) yet women expect more and more as the man sacrifices more.

Men die earlier than women. Expecting men to retire at the same age is ridiculous . Men also die in poorer health. Shouldn't men be allowed to retire earlier.

If a man retires at 65 and dies at an average age of 80 75, he only lives 10 years after he retires.

If a woman retires at 60 and dies at an average age of 80, she lives 20 years after she retires.

A woman spends 10 years more in retirement. So much for equality.

If men retire at 60 and women at 65, it gives them both 15 years to live after they retire. Seems much more fair.

On a related note:

Men are very likely to die after their wives die. The vice versa doesn't apply. Says a lot about a womans love doesn't it.

**musicman.2** · 2nd-April-2009

Here's Glenn Sacks' take on that article about retirement.

http://www.bloggernews.net/113147

Men's jobs are usually harder as he says. That is the first gap that needs to be evened out. Followed by the retirement gap. Eliminating these two gaps could possibly eliminate the life expectancy gap.

**MikeT** · 9th-April-2009

Research shows that dads matter.

You mean to tell me that some idiot actually had to do "some research" to come to this conclusion?
What the hell is this world coming to?

**shaazam** · 9th-April-2009

Quote from MikeT

You mean to tell me that some idiot actually had to do "some research" to come to this conclusion?
What the hell is this world coming to?

"""...they strain at a gnat and swallow a camel ...." - Bible

the feminits "wimyn's studies" strain to produce such obvious conclusions

**RebelliousVanilla** · 9th-April-2009

There should be an upper limit for child support and the rest should be given only if the noncustodial parents wants to pay.

**MikeT** · 9th-April-2009

Quote from RebelliousVanilla

There should be an upper limit for child support and the rest should be given only if the noncustodial parents wants to pay.

This is the thing RV,
the person that pays, is usually the one that has least access to their children.
If I were running the show, it would be based upon the percentage of time that the kids are with each parent, then maybe you'd see some sort of equality in the amount of time fathers are allowed with their kids.

These C$A payment levels are rediculous.

**RebelliousVanilla** · 9th-April-2009

MikeT, you have a point and I thought of that before.

**Percy** · 10th-April-2009

To be in a podcast that I will do in the next few days.

An extensive content analysis of mass media portrayals of men and male identity undertaken for a PhD completed in 2005 through the University of Western Sydney focusing on news, features, current affairs, talk shows and lifestyle media, found that men are widely demonised, marginalised, trivialised and objectified in non-fiction media content that allegedly presents facts, reality and “truth”.

The study involved collection of all editorial content referring to or portraying men from 650 newspaper editions (450 broadsheets and 200 tabloids), 130 magazines, 125 TV news bulletins, 147 TV current affairs programs, 125 talk show episodes, and 108 TV lifestyle program episodes from 20 of the highest circulation and rating newspapers, magazines and TV programs over a six-month period. All that concentrated into such a short time. Media articles were examined using in-depth quantitative and qualitative content analysis methodology.

This comprehensive and exhaustive research found in volume that fully 69 per cent of mass media reporting and commentary on men was unfavourable compared with just 12 per cent favourable and 19 per cent neutral.

Men were predominately reported or portrayed in mass media as villains, aggressors, perverts and philanderers, with more than 75 per cent of all mass media representations of men and male identities showing men in one of these four ways.

More than 80 per cent of media mentions of men, in total, were negative, compared with 18.4 per cent of mentions which showed men in a positive role.

The overwhelmingly negative reporting and portrayals of men in mass media news, current affairs, talk shows and lifestyle media was mainly in relation to violence and aggression. Violent crime, including murder, assault, armed robberies and attacks such as bashings, accounted for almost 40 per cent of all media reporting of male violence and aggression, followed by sexual abuse (20.5 per cent), general crime (18.6 per cent) and domestic violence (7.3 per cent).

What an image of men to present to the Primary Consumer – women !

Disregarded is the fact that crime is a feature of a tiny minority in our society and the vast majority of men are law-abiding, family supporting, self-sacrificing chaps going about their lawful occasions.

Other major topics of media coverage of men were fatherhood and family, male sexuality, work and career, and men’s social behaviour. In all of these categories, men were predominantly reported and portrayed negatively.

Fatherhood was also a prominent also-ran subject discussed in 361 media articles and features during the period of the study. Some media coverage positively discussed men as fathers, pointing to increasing recognition of the importance of fathers in children’s lives. However, along with recognition of the importance of fathers and the depth of many men’s emotional connection with their children, discussion contained an almost equal number of criticisms of men as “deadbeat dads”, “commitment phobic” and as perpetrators of domestic violence and sexual abuse within families.

That sexual abuse is far less common in a family with a biological father in it – in fact statistically negligible - than without, is totally ignored or suppressed.

The Australian Advertising Standards Bureau reported in 2005 that TV commercials drew a record number of complaints from men during 2004 and that the number of complaints by men is increasing while those from women are decreasing.

The Australian Federal Government’s 73 Million Dollar advertising campaign against domestic violence which targeted only men as perpetrators of domestic violence was labeled “propaganda against men” with many men criticising its “stereotypical portrayals” as reported in The Age, January 3, 2005).

**Jack** · 10th-April-2009

Quote from Percy

To be in a podcast that I will do in the next few days.

Do you have a link to where that will be available?

**Zuberi** · 10th-April-2009

Do you ever wonder I the media is so cheap and ignorant?

Read this.

"If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.
The business of journalists is to destroy the truth; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell this country and this race for their daily bread.
We are the tools and vessels for rich men behind the scenes.
We are the jumping jacks, they (The illuminati) pull the strings and we dance.
Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men.
We are intellectual prostitutes."

**haahoo** · 10th-April-2009

I do wish people would stop thinking there is a "fair" level of child support that should be paid..

Its fucking dumbassed logic to suggest that their can ever be a "fair" figure..

A turd is still a turd if you cut it down to size isnt it?

You still wanna swallow it?

The correct figure the state should force an absent parent to pay for his/her childrens support is ZERO!!

The whole concept of it is completely and utterly destructive of good gender relations.

Zero enforced child support.!!!

The state should have no say in this whatsoever, it is between the parents..

**MikeT** · 10th-April-2009

Quote from haahoo

I do wish people would stop thinking there is a "fair" level of child support that should be paid.

Zero enforced child support.!!!

The state should have no say in this whatsoever, it is between the parents..

Yes, but we have the feminists in the mix telling men that they must slave for poisoning the well.
These same feminists EXPECT men to put wimmin up on a financial pedestal and support their every want and need(however fucked up and wasteful they are)
These same feminists run the Family Caught.
These same feminists say men are disposable, if a women doesn't like one, she has the right to divorce him and expect him to pay and move onto the next un-witting man.
The whole thing is a feminised fucking gravy-train.

For a moment, reverse the genders, the man has the kids and the woman has to work her arse off to support the 3 kids that her ex-husband has custody of and she very rarely gets to see, the Family Caught gave him pretty much sole parentage.

{SORRY, I have been watching far too many fantasy movies lately}

What is going on here?

Hahoo,

I can agree with you, if these women can't support these kids on her own, why the hell did they get pregnant in the first place?

The idea that "I'm pregnant, I need money and support", is backwards planning.
It is about time that some of these mothers got off their fat arses and saved up some real cash before whining to Government agencies, crying poverty.

A child will cost you $$$$$, I don't think most people realise that.
Condoms are pretty cheap though.
Or maybe just saying no, is even less expensive.

**haahoo** · 10th-April-2009

Forcing folk to pay child support is counter productive. It is also illogical considering that children are state property these days..

Even Greer says that the state should pay for raising kids, not parents!!

Parents can make their own arrangements, and would do, things would be so much more HARMONIOUS if women had to beg and grovel and plead!

I mean, they may not even consider divorce in the first place!

They'd have to recalibrate their best interests!

Women, are VERY ADAPTIVE when they have to be!!

Reality check..

Most CS payments are NOWHERE NEAR covering the full costs of raising kids..

Its just tokenism, TO PROP UP THE STATE!

The levels are set at THE MAXIMUM THE STATE THINKS MEN WILL ACCEPT!

I see a stark choice..

What does the MRM want to see?

No CSA?

Or more male suicide?

What is the appopriate "accepetable" level of male suicide the state wishes to set its figures for theft at?

How many men does the state need to disincentivise through this ludicrous "feminazi tax on fatherhood"?

Why do the conservatives and the socialists BOTH insist on trying to claw back the expenses of their family wrecking policies from the victims?