Add the following to the list of things I don't get:
1) The choice to have no relationship with one's child.
2) The idea that a man should claim any and every child that someone claims is his or that is born on his watch.
3) The idea that a man is wrong for wanting custody of his child, also known as "taking that baby from his momma."
This list was only partially inspired by princess dominique's recent post. Collectively, these and other issues have been fuggin' with me for some time, now. This was just the push I needed to put e-pen to e-page.
Regarding #1
Besides "deadbeat dads," I've also known more than one man to say that, if a woman had his baby but pretended it belonged to another man, he wouldn't even want to know - and if he did know, he wouldn't attempt to prove his own paternity or have a relationship with the child.
This disgusts and scares me. It's the scuffed-up, fucked-up flip-side of the I'm-gonna-lie-and-say-you're-the-daddy coin.
Regarding #2
From what I understand, if a married couple has a baby and it's obvious (or even proven) that the husband is not the father, the husband is remains legally responsible for that child. If the mother lied about the child's paternity, that doesn't seem to matter. The fact that this child HAS a father out there doesn't seem to matter.
"Your wife? Her baby? Your problem?"
That seems to be how it goes. I've got a big problem with that.
I've known people to act as if a guy who would walk away from such a situation is the bad guy. That is such a load of bullshit that I hardly even know where to begin to touch it.
Yes, children's best-interests are of great import, but let's not get too simplistic about things. There are plenty of reasons, psychological and physical, why a child ought to know who the hell his or her biological father is. If the lied-to, cheated-on husband decides to stick around and raise the child as his own, more power to him. If he decides to leave, I don't blame him for that, either.
There's some old-fashioned thinking that I'd love to see get purged from this society. Among them is the idea that all women are above reproach and none of them ever lie about a child's paternity.
It's a helluva lot worse to tell a man that he's definitely the father, when you don't know that for sure, than it is for a man to make sure that he is.
Regarding #3
Along with, "You know you dat baby's daddy!" there's also "How you gon' take dat baby from its momma?!"
Both are antiquated concepts. In fact, antiquity suggests that they're old, but worth keeping around. So, allow me to correct myself. Those are out-dated concepts.
You don't get to beat a man over the head with the responsibilities of fatherhood, yet deny him all the rights associated with paternity.
Why don't I hear "How you gon' take dat baby from its daddy?!" Why don't I hear (many) people complaining when a woman denies a father the right to see his child because the father's behind on child-support payments? Cuz see, that's also denying the child the right to see his father.
That's not to say a man shouldn't look after his child, but these types of rights aren't something that anyone can give or take away. They just are.
If a man wants to see or even to have primary custody of his child, he has just as much of a right to do so as any mother.
Momma's not always right and Poppa's not always wrong. Hell, for that matter, Poppa ain't always Poppa!
If a man doesn't do right by "his" (however society and/or the law might define that) child, he can face prosecution, jail-time, having his wages garnished, losing his driver's license, etc.
I look forward to the day when a mother who lies about her child's paternity faces the same potential punishment.
It bugs me when people act like men and women are equal - except when it's inconvenient for this to be so.
4 comments:
This much be a touchy subject or something, because ain't NOBODY came up in here.
I have to say that I can't stand when females do that .... hooking and jabbing 'bout some child support, but won't let the child come within 50 yards of his/her father. UNLESS you can prove (in a court of LAW) daddy to be a threat to his child, he has that right. Some of these women are the same broads who holler that they're doing it all by themselves, yet they have options. Don't come crying to me with your self-induced hardship! UUGH! That pisses me off!
Something else I don't understand .... why is it okay NOW to send a child to his/her father when the child is getting out of hand?
re: "This much be a touchy subject or something, because ain't NOBODY came up in here."
LOL
re: "I have to say that I can't stand when females do that .... hooking and jabbing 'bout some child support, but won't let the child come within 50 yards of his/her father. UNLESS you can prove (in a court of LAW) daddy to be a threat to his child, he has that right. Some of these women are the same broads who holler that they're doing it all by themselves, yet they have options. Don't come crying to me with your self-induced hardship! UUGH! That pisses me off!"
Sounds like my complaints about a recent movie.
re: "Something else I don't understand .... why is it okay NOW to send a child to his/her father when the child is getting out of hand?"
Did it not used to be or are you talking about women who wouldn't let the dad visit the child... until the child got out of hand and she wanted to send the kid away?
Not that it's the exact same thing, but that reminded me of BOYZ IN THE HOOD. The dynamic between the father and mother was impressive and quite unique in cinema - Black or otherwise.
Sending a child to his/her dad AFTER all that drama, was more of what I was thinking of.
It's different when the parents have discussed AND agreed, but if it's not "lawd this child is driving me insane. your turn", it leans toward, "he/she needs his/her father in his life".... even THAT doesn't make sense.
To me, in Boyz In The Hood, Tre didn't seem that difficult. And considering he went from bad to worse (exposure), I really don't see how Tre benefited by living with his dad. Yeah, with his father, he learned how to deal with the streets. He was probably scared straight.
If the parents live far from each other, I could see sending the child from moms to pops (or vice-versa) for any number of reasons.
Your perspective on BitH (funny; that looks a helluva lot like "bitch") is interesting. I'm not sure if the dad's neighborhood was better than the mom's, but I didn't remember Tre getting worse.
I think you're probably right about being "scared straight."
Post a Comment