Archive for May, 2007

23
May

Unconventional Wisdom on Men and Divorce

A recent article on divorce in Canada may overturn one’s impression of who suffers the most after family break-up:

The stereotype might be that a man relishes trading his wife for a fast car or a younger woman, but a new study finds that men appear to take separation harder than women.
While both men and women whose marriages have dissolved have a higher risk of being depressed than people who remained with their spouses, a Statistics Canada study found that men who had divorced or separated were six times more likely to report an episode of depression compared with men who remained married.
Women who had undergone marital breakups were 3.5 times more likely to have had bouts of depression than their counterparts who were still in relationships.

Nineteen per cent of men who were no longer with their spouse found a decline in social support, while only six per cent of men who remained in a relationship found a drop. Among women the proportions were 11 per cent for those no longer in a relationship and five for those who were.

The study found that 34 per cent of men and three per cent of women were residing with at least one less child after the breakdown of their relationship.

The article also mentions a general disparity in wealth between men and women after divorce, but does not take into account the programs in place to help women in these situations (discounted daycare, Battered Women’s Support Services, support groups and not least a state-funded gender advocacy group) or the fact that equivalent facilities rarely exist for men in the same custondial situation.

A lawyer specializing in separations once told me that a divorce is very much like a death and that irrational/grief-induced behaviour by both parties is often the result. Unfortunately, his advice was merely a late-coming summary – most people in my generation have bore witness to at least one really bad divorce and several other soul-destroying separations. One early observation I made was that nearly all the attention and concern is placed with the woman – concerned parties want to know whether the woman is still emotionally stable or whether she’ll be able to cope with the children. The man is often assumed to have done something wrong to provoke the divorce, and -consistent with 1950′s folklore- will stoicly endure beyond the breakup. That’s what Gary Cooper would do, right?

21st century reality defies this notion. Anecdotally, I’ve witnessed women in relationships abuse their male counterparts physically, abuse their male counterparts and children mentally/emotionally, bring false charges upon their men (which police officers have informed my colleagues they must ALWAYS investigate, effectively convicting the man in the court of public opinion) and simply abandon the family for a third party du jour. In nearly every case, the female got custody of the children and the male simply had to “pay up” so that he might see his children … or otherwise face jail time.

The role of the male in family life has changed dramatically since the women’s liberation movement of the 1960′s. Men no longer suffice as stern and detached bread-winners, but are also expected to be nurturing and emotionally-focused mentors to their children. To a great extent this social conditioning has worked, as more than a few men can be seen pushing strollers or cutting out of work early to pick up the kids. Why, then, have the courts and the social infrastructure not kept up with the times? Why should a court automatically assume the mother is the most capable parent in all but the most extreme situations? How come there are few social resources for single fathers? As the article above lightly hints, there is a hidden toll for our refusal to acknowledge that men also suffer from not having their families intact or having readily available social networks to deal with financial/emotional burden of separation. Unfortunately, few people seem to think about it until a jilted male takes matters into his own hands, and by then it’s too late.

Sphere: Related Content

16
May

The Glamour Girl Pecking Order

The CPC is cracking down on immigration. Wait – before “old Canada” flutters to orgasm, keep reading (National Post) -

The federal government proposes to ban immigrants who want to come to Canada as exotic dancers, the immigration minister announced Wednesday.Canada will ban immigrants who want to come to Canada as exotic dancers, the federal government announced Wednesday.

“I’m proud to announce that later today I will table legislation to help prevent vulnerable foreign workers such as strippers from being exploited or abused,” Immigration Minister Diane Finley told the House of Commons during question period.

The proposed legislation seeks to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to authorize the citizenship and immigration minister to instruct immigration officers to deny work permits to foreign strippers, Ms. Finley said.

Staying true to the site slogan, let’s dissect what might be behind this proposed ban. After all, letting a few strippers in the country is neither here nor there in terms of numbers and P.M. Harper isn’t exactly a Christian fundamentalist.

Chances are this move is a swipe at organized crime. Diane Finley’s comments about exploitation refer not so much to the idea of a woman dancing in front of men as the circumstances under which these women perform their duties. Most of them are controlled by Asian, Russian and Biker gangs – forced to live under lock and key while being expected to do just a little bit more for their patrons than the average stripper.

Many men who frequent these institutions prefer foreign strippers -

  • As mentioned above, they are willing to go a little further, which usually means touching or full-on intercourse. Basically, dancing turns into full-on prostitution and sometimes the women have no say in the matter
  • As a broad generalization, foreign strippers tend to be more fit than the local girls. Generally speaking, there is a pecking order for domestic ladies that wish to use their looks and sexuality to get ahead -

The Glamour Girl Pecking Order:

  1. Entertainer (meaning actress or singer)
  2. Model
  3. Sunshine Girl
  4. Car Show Girl
  5. Stripper
  6. Prostitute
  7. pr0n

The worse a gal’s lot in life, the lower on the totem pole she reaches, or so it would seem. Thus, by the time a local woman makes it to stripper, she’s typically past her glory days, nursing a drug habit and possibly has kids to feed. This pales in comparison to the nice looking Asian and Eastern European immigrants who may also have kids to feed and want a better life. Regardless, this form of immigration encourages borderline slavery and the government is right to crack down.

Sphere: Related Content

14
May

Crux of the Matter

As some of you may be aware, Cynics Unlimited is hosted on a general site called Cynasta.com. While the web space was originally intended for CU, there are several other sites hosted in the same space with a few under consideration.

This week, we welcome Crux of the Matter, a new and improved version of the blogger.com classic. For awhile it looked like Sandy (the blog’s author) was going to leave the blogging game, as she shut down her original site and announced an early retirement. Fortunately, she accepted a guest-writing spot at Jack’s site and later had a change of heart about having her own space. Since Sandy and I are both perfectionists, there will be much tinkering with the template over the next few weeks; however, Crux of the Matter is essentially open for business and you are encouraged to check out her posts. From the site description:

Crux-of-the-Matter is a registered domain and Sandy is the blogger here, as well as a guest writer at Jack’s Newswatch. She is a retired educator and academic, as well as having several years experience as a political writer and strategist while working for an Ontario MPP in the first Mike Harris government. She currently supports the Progressive Conservative Party in Ontario and the Stephen Harper government in Ottawa.

Apart from political writing, Crux of the Matter deals with education and learning disability issues. It is well worth your while to have a look at this welcome source of original material.

Other Cynasta sites:
Cynics Unlimited – Somewhat of my soapbox, but also home to the the meanderings of several diverse people with strong opinions
Psychopolitik – Libertarian blog from an unlikely sourced located down South
Jack’s NewsWatch – News and editorials from an ex-police officer who is not afraid to lay a smack down.

Sphere: Related Content

08
May

Why Canadians Aren’t Talking about Abortion … and Won’t

A recent and rather gutsy National Post article mused about the lack of open debate in Canada concerning abortion. According to the article, the issue is just as divisive in Canada as in the USA, but rarely receives the kind of mainstream media attention or even town-hall style debate that happens between well organized groups in the United States.

A few days later, the National Post illustrated exactly why most Canadians (particularly politicians) are loathe to debate abortion in the public square.

abortionletter.jpg

The letter’s author, Philip Ney (reportedly a doctor) stated by scolding the National Post for referring to camp opposing abortion as “anti-abortionists”. Ney’s reasoning is that it is polite discourse to refer to groups as they refer to themselves – in this case, “Pro-Life”. Mr. Ney then immediately flouts his own rules by referring to doctors who perform abortions as “anti-life”, when he knows very well they would prefer to be called pro-choice. Ney makes no bones about his pro-life stance, but ironically never stops to consider whether the constant sniping between pro-life and pro-choice is part of the reason why few doctors want to perform abortions. Ney’s assertions in combination with his status as an MD should give pause to any woman wanting to speak with her doctor about having an abortion – a sermon might be dispensed where impartial counsel was expected.

Hence, the reason for the muted debate in Canada is simple: any position taken will eventually lead to demonizing of the highest order. People who oppose abortion absolutely can look forward to being slandered as a bible-thumping Neanderthals who view women as barefoot chattel. Supporters of abortion-on-demand will in kind be cast as child-hating murderers hell-bent on ushering in the second holocaust. The majority of people who hold views between the aforementioned extremes can expect sniping from both sides as well as from the other shades of grey.

The intensity of the debate is heightened by the nature of its abstraction – one side is arguing on behalf of individual rights while the other is arguing for sanctity of life. The Christian-influenced democracies of the West were formed and refined in adherence to both ideals, and a large percentage of any truly “Western” society is likely to turn cold at the prospect of heavily sacrificing one for the other. Ignoring either principle en masse has led to some of the West’s greatest tragedies, most notably slavery and the Holocaust.

Thus, it’s no great surprise that the pro-life camp argue we are in the midst of another such tragedy, while the pro-choice camp maintains that, without their vigilance, we could roll back into another one. Mix in a little religion (lacking direct instruction in its scripture) with science (lacking a universally accepted answer to when “life begins”) and you’ve got a topic that will continue to be avoided by a nation more at ease with rational discourse than with the dramatic conflicts common south of the border.

Sphere: Related Content




Further Research


RSSQuick Shots




Categories


Archives