Fathers First

I am creating the hash tag #FathersFirst, and here is the mission statement:

We, in the west, are currently living in a matriarchal system. Most single parents are mothers. Even in marriage, women (the mother of the family unit) hold all the actual authority because she holds the power of divorce. She holds the power of divorce because whoever gets awarded child custody hits the jackpot in divorce court. The reason she gets the child is because our culture values motherhood more than fatherhood. We see women as naturally better caregivers, and men as financial providers. We must push the notion that men make equal or better parents. We must erase the notion that a mans only, or primary, contribution to the family is being a wage slave.

While I hope one day to see a genuine fathers first movement devoid of partisan politics, right now my main goal is to discourage MRA’s (Mens Rights Activists) from perpetuating the notion that women are naturally better caregivers, or that a woman’s place is in the home raising babies, and others such drivel that ultimately translates to praising the sanctity of motherhood. I feel that out of all the political movements in the world, a genuine mens rights movement should be the primary platform to push the notion of Fathers First. It is heart breaking to see how much praise motherhood gets from within that movement.

I am asking all MRA’s to stop posting anything that advocates women’s role is to raise children, or children are to be raised by their mother, or that women have any advantages in parenthood. I ask that instead, you focus on fathers, working fathers, stay at home fathers, men as being entitled or better suited to raise children. In a culture that worships the sanctity of motherhood to the point of making the words “parent” and “mother” synonyms, I am asking that we buck this trend and promote fathers first.

Self described Mens Rights Activists that continue to in anyway, promote motherhood as more natural or preferred than fatherhood, aren’t really respecting the integrity of the title “Mens Rights Activist” and should either stop posting pro-motherhood material, or stop marching under the MRA label.

If you support fathers rights, than retweet, retumble, and reblog this.


8 thoughts on “Fathers First

  1. Aporiac Socrates

    Fucking fantastic! I usually agree with you on most things, but disagree on some. This time I agree 100%!

    I am a father, and was a far better parent in every respect than my ex-wife (with the sole exception of breastfeeding!) Nevertheless, she ended up with sole custody of our kids after our separation, fucked them over, and then fucked them up, in large part to fuck-over and fuck-up me! And you are right – one of the main motivators for many mothers seeking primary/sole carer status after divorce/separation is financial. This HARMS children, and destroys the lives of many great fathers.

    I would go further than you and say that any man who contributes to the mystification of motherhood does not deserve the title ‘human being,’ let alone MRA. To deny the necessity of male involvement with children, especially in the role of father, is to dehumanise men. Kant said that a man’s children are part of his integrity as a human being. To privilege women as parents, which is always accompanied by fathers being downgraded to the point of being superfluous (another form of male disposability), is the deepest possible attack on the integrity of fathers as human beings. Furthermore, men collectively have an INESCAPABLE duty to be concerned with the collective welfare of children, which is FAR too important to be left exclusively in the hands of women. The surrendering of this ground is the greatest betrayal that men have committed.

  2. Laguz

    First of all, I want to thank you for your father’s first video.
    Regardless of what happens with your movement, regardless of my what my personal position about MGTOW ends up being, having more men hear this is helpful. It was given to me in an argument, and it is the reason I am listening to your videos and am taking what the MGTOW movement has to say seriously.
    Having listened to your 6 part video series about the failings of the MRM, I am no longer confident it represents my interest as a father as it claims to. At least not anymore then feminists do when they claim the same thing. That there are traditionalists voices within the MRM is not surprising, but as far as who is at the helm, who is the majority and who determines the actual activism (If it exists)… I just don’t know.
    What I am struggling to understand, is what makes MGTOW the alternative? The father’s first video shows good intentions, but Is the MGTOW the honest non-traditionalist man’s rights movement’s replacement, or a lifestlye choice? If the MRM activism truly never petitions governments & municipalities or does anything involving actual activity… Are you guys going too? Are you hoping the MRM will get its shit together and try to prove that they do care about men? if not, Don’t we need some organization that does? Is the MGTOW movement going to become this organization itself? That women will notice our problem if enough of them didn’t find willing husbands and change things to appease us?

    If so, The reason I initially didn’t take MGTOW seriously might be worth addressing: How is it a sustainable movement?
    If the young men joining MGTOW today won’t be in a relationship or some sort of situation in which they get to raise kids according to their ideology, then no matter how bright the initial flame might be, it will extinguish itself pretty fast, and so will any ability it might have to make an impact, much like the feminist attempts at lesbian separatism. Some MGTOW might already have children, but if they successfully transfer their ideas, will they have grandchildren?
    perhaps you consider this is a positive thing, leaving it for adult men to join on their own will, but in the meantime everyone who apposes you will come up with new ways to frame you dismiss you and develop new go-to counter arguments to teach their kids when they ask what is that MGTOW thing they have heard about in school. On the laggy machine that is social change, which usually is only really made possible by people dying rather then changing their minds, It might very well take more then a single generation to make whatever impact it is the strike is aiming to make, especially if your plan is to get the world’s attention through a long term population drop.
    This is all in addition to the challenge any attempt to pursue men’s rights is going to have: Even if men can get rid of their favoritism towards women on a massive enough scale, how big of an impact can happen without somehow developing our own kind of in-group bias? Which creates a horrible transition and doesn’t at all bring me to my next point…

    Aren’t your arguments fundamentally gynocentric: themselves?
    Throughout your videos, and what I have seen of the MGTOW movement so far, I see a constant appeal to to basis of female nature, what they are wired to do and have no choice but doing. You are building your arguments on the assumption of defeatist biological determinism as core theory of how to analyzes women’s behaviors and gender biased social patterns. In the same time, the MGTOW movement in principle argues that the solution is that men go their own way and overcome this gynocentric instinct we apparently all share. These create a few problems.
    The implication here is a defeatist assumption about women’s biological determinism while assuming personal agency when it comes to men. Women can be nothing but victims to what is forced upon them, while only men can assume responsibility. Why does that world view sounds so familiar?
    That you are saying this while in the same time saying how feminists making claims or utilizing theories with certain underlining assumptions about men’s nature is misandry is not only a double standard, it’s copying their exact double standard. Who knows, it might just be an inherit part of any gender advocacy movement and we simply do not have enough genders as a species to turn that into a statistic.The problem is the very likely possibility that copying the same tactics will yield the same mistakes.
    As you might know from your own experience, when feminists do this to you as a man, you are often confronted with a world view where there is nothing you can do about it. Your sex is inherently a weapon, you are inherently feeding off of rape culture, you are the cell of an all powerful hive-mind entity that uses it’s invisible tentacles to manipulate our subconscious thoughts for the single purpose of oppressing women. The point is: You are a monster, and nothing you’ll say or do will ever atone for the sin of existing as a member of your gender.
    When feminists do this, they are merely missing the irony of stripping away your personal agency and giving you responsibility for it in the same time. But when you do this, by stripping a woman of any hope for personal agency and making them perpetual victims to their own damn wiring, you are reinforcing the very gynocentrism you claim to be against, I believe you’ve spoken about this very effect yourself in response to the 1984 comment.
    i might receive name calling at this point, but unless your framework actually presents women with a choice about how they could treat men well, your hypothesis that they are inherently incapable of choosing to do so will never be anything but another untestable hypothesis, another entry to the schizophrenic world where movements can’t seem to decide if they are an ideology, a religion or a Monday to Friday lifestyle choice.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s