PDA

View Full Version : Lack of fathers caused London Riots...


Flyingphil172
14th August 2011, 04:18 PM
A rather ridiculous opinion article in todays Daily Tabloid (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/pregnancy-of-penny-wongs-female-partner-no-cause-for-mass-celebration/story-e6frezz0-1226114379311) . Apparently the London riots were caused by children being brought up without a father figure. Plenty of other fallacies, but too many to list!



You only had to see the burning streets of London last week to see the manifestation of a fatherless society.

The collapse of family life in Britain has been laid bare, reported to have the highest proportion of single mothers in Europe and nearly half of all children suffering family breakdown by the age of 16.
Fatherless families in underprivileged boroughs of London are the norm.
People were quick to call for sanctions on the parents of feral youth looting shops and torching buildings.

Clapham shop-owner Elizabeth Pilgrim wailed to the BBC: "They're feral rats. What are those parents doing? Those children should be at home. They shouldn't be out here causing mayhem."

But the fact is the fathers of those children are probably long gone. There are no "parents" to take charge and exert control over their wayward children.

The welfare state has taken over the father's role of protector, provider, and enforcer, substituting sit-down money for love and care. And what a mess it has made: fatherless boys full of incoherent rage, fatherless girls having another generation of fatherless babies to a string of feckless men.

It is politically incorrect to say so, but the ideal situation for a child is to be brought up in an intact family with a father and a mother.
As a rule, what prevents social chaos and the underclass is an intact family. What keeps children safe is an intact family, with a father in the home.



I'm not sure whether this article is more ridiculous than previous opinion pieces from the same author which blamed the 2009 Victorian bushfires on the Greens blocking logging on private property(using what power?). Or opposing the NSW ethics classes because Australia was based on "Judo-Christian values".

sosman
14th August 2011, 04:26 PM
Clapham shop-owner Elizabeth Pilgrim wailed ...

That has to be a setup for a Monty Python sketch ...

Darwinsbulldog
14th August 2011, 05:07 PM
The end is nigh. The world is filled with stoopid. :(

GenericBox
14th August 2011, 05:32 PM
I like this article. I was raised from birth in a fatherless home, at least now I have an excuse to go steal shit.

Annie
14th August 2011, 06:48 PM
I must remember to tell my adult kids to go out and riot. It's something I've forgotten to teach them. I am a very bad mum. :-(


---
- King Latapat.

Annie
14th August 2011, 08:21 PM
Hey! My dad was asleep in his chair while I burned down a large section of our house. Unintentionally. Never. Repeat Never, leave matches and a curious feeling wax paper drawing hanging on a wooden wardrobe in the same room as an eight year old.



---
- King Latapat.

Aldaron
14th August 2011, 09:41 PM
Ah...isn't it nice to see Miranda Devine getting another opportunity to use anything to bash gays (Penny Wong and her partner, in this case), while taking a sideways swipe at liberalism in the same breath.

MIranda, Piers Akerman, Andrew Bolt, Alan Jones...all birds of a feather. Paranoid, blinkered, ignorant, vicious and in love with their own exhortations to hate.

riddlemethis
14th August 2011, 10:31 PM
Ever wondered what a mysoginist woman sounds like - read a Miranda Devine column today!

Disgraceful Neanderthal she is.

riddlemethis
14th August 2011, 10:40 PM
That has to be a setup for a Monty Python sketch ...

Bwahahaha! Exactly what I thought too! All's missing is 'when I was a kid', in true 'uphill, both ways' fist shaking fashion. Hilarious were it not so serious!

Sir Patrick Crocodile
14th August 2011, 10:59 PM
I see. So theoretically if we were to have more families with two fathers then not only will there not be any riots in London but also everybody will be each others' friend and so it is a peaceful bliss.

I guess these same people were trying to prove that gay marriage is bad? ;)

Logic please
15th August 2011, 12:24 AM
A rather ridiculous opinion article in todays Daily Tabloid (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/pregnancy-of-penny-wongs-female-partner-no-cause-for-mass-celebration/story-e6frezz0-1226114379311) . Apparently the London riots were caused by children being brought up without a father figure. Plenty of other fallacies, but too many to list!
And just for good measure, was reproduced in the Sunday H-Sun (pg. 89).

(Un)happily for her own *argument*, Miranda Devine blows it out of the water herself, unaided, by admitting that in Senator Wong's case, the father (you know, allegedly non-existent, but still somehow managed to contribute the necessary sperm??? :rolleyes:) will be known to the child. Miranda (and everyone else) has no way of knowing how extensive or beneficial that involvement might be, at this point.

So, any link to the issue of "unknown / absent father" is arguably premature and specious, in this case.
But a lot of other people are having a field day, cynically using the four-month-old pregnancy as a weapon in the relentless push for same-sex marriage.
And may I ask, what of the cynicism of Miranda has displayed in using it as a springboard to argue for her narrow, traditionalist view of "family", against the background of the riots in Britain?

I guess it's only a cynical tactic if the "other side" employs it, eh?

There are no "parents" to take charge and exert control over their wayward children.
Sorry, there's a little too much conflation of "parent" with "father" here, methinks. Also a bit of selling mothers short, by implying that they can't exercise firm authority when needed, no???
It is politically incorrect to say so, but the ideal situation for a child is to be brought up in an intact family with a father and a mother.
As a rule, what prevents social chaos and the underclass is an intact family. What keeps children safe is an intact family, with a father in the home.
Families lose a parent (father or mother) for all sorts of reasons. This doesn't necessarily condemn them to dysfunctionality.

If you want to follow this line of thinking a bit further, are you therefore going to mandate that all single-parent families partner-up ASAP to protect childrens' rights, no matter what? Sounds a bit totalitarian, doesn't it... :eek:

This leads to something I've see a bit, recently - the "rights of the child" fallacy. As a "stalking horse" for the traditional religious view of family, and to try to head off any accusations of bigotry, they argue that the "rights" of children are violated by not having a mother and father. Of course, while this is used as an alleged "knock-down" argument against same-sex unions and premarital relationships, they are curiously quiet on the issue of single-parent families caused by other means... :rolleyes:

Silly me, I would've thought that a "missing" parent had a similarly detrimental effect on the child (and their "rights" :rolleyes:), no matter how the unfortunate absence came about...

Darwinsbulldog
15th August 2011, 01:29 AM
Ever wondered what a mysoginist woman sounds like - read a Miranda Devine column today!

Disgraceful Neanderthal she is.
Hey, stop insulting Neanderthals! :mad: ;);):):)

Xeno
15th August 2011, 06:08 AM
I did not read the entire "i vain demander" article because I know what she sounds like. During Insiders on ABC yesterday Marr read out the first line of the article, slapped his forehead and said "This is just barmy!" It seemed an adequate response.

In any case, I am too busy puzzling over the exact number of siblings to which each child has a right and how one determines their rightful ordering.

FondofBeetles
15th August 2011, 06:52 AM
If a child is the result of a violent rapist's attack (is that redundant?) should the parent be encouraged to "take charge and exert control" over his offspring?

simonecuttlefish
15th August 2011, 08:51 AM
If a child is the result of a violent rapist's attack (is that redundant?) should the parent be encouraged to "take charge and exert control" over his offspring?

Clearly, the bible says a virgin should marry her rapist silly ... after he has bought the girl off her father that is!

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+22%3A28-29&version=KJV

Deuteronomy 22:28-29
King James Version (KJV)

28If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

29Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

See! There is a biblical moral for every situation.

riddlemethis
15th August 2011, 12:45 PM
I love it when you drop by SCF! ;-) hope you're feeling better!

Voltairine
15th August 2011, 01:10 PM
Saw one person, early on in the looting "schedule", who objected to the looters being called "scum" by pissed-off interviewed residents... because it might affect their self-esteem! Diddums!

cyclist
16th August 2011, 05:26 AM
I heard a news report about the British parliament discussing the reasons for the riots. They did mention about the lack of fathers as well as lack of education. There were others in there as well.

A young woman was interviewed in a sound bite, and she said that she's never had a father and never even been arrested. Obviously there is a lot of wiggle room in the quote, but it does show that it isn't a lack of fathers that can cause the problem.

James

AUSloth
16th August 2011, 06:29 AM
28If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

(my bolding)
Don't you just love that other bit of x-tian morality "it's only wrong if your caught"

Sieveboy
16th August 2011, 06:36 AM
Saw one person, early on in the looting "schedule", who objected to the looters being called "scum" by pissed-off interviewed residents... because it might affect their self-esteem! Diddums!

Voltairine, your Avatar is extremely apt for that comment. What a freaking tool that person is. I wonder if the new shoes the scumbags stole will improve their self esteem?

Flyingphil172
18th August 2011, 01:05 PM
Apparently people have been hurling lots of abuse at Miranda Divine over that article.
So she's tried to defend herself with another article (http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/mirandadevine/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/jack_boot_left_gives_dads_a_kicking/) which, in line with the quality of the newspaper, was published in today's edition.

wearestardust
18th August 2011, 01:13 PM
Good response by Kerryn Phelps to the first Devine article:

http://thehoopla.com.au/kerrynphelps/

Dear Miranda,

It’s been a while since we crossed swords, so it was intriguing on the weekend to read your theories (http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/mirandadevine/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/its_a_myth_conception#88319) about the cause of the UK riots. It was such a master stroke linking the riots to the announcement that Senator Penny Wong and Sophie Allouache are expecting a baby. Nobody would have thought of that!

Except maybe Bob Katter.

Or Barnaby Joyce.

Or that Murphy guy from Western Sydney who nobody had heard of before.

David Cameron must be relieved. I am sure he had a sleepless flight on the way back from Tuscany once the riots were nearly over, thinking about how complex the solution to this perplexing problem was going to be. That was, until he read your piece showing how it all boiled down to “a fatherless society”. Lesbian mothers. Single mothers. Penny and Sophie. Pass a law to make fathers compulsory and stop them ever leaving and bingo. Problem solved!

Bummer when the UK papers reported how many rich kids from private schools and living with biological mum and dad were arrested for looting.

Don’t you hate it when the facts get in the way of a good theory?

Apparently you were also concerned that some people were “having a field day, cynically using the four-month pregnancy as a weapon in the relentless push for same-sex marriage”. Well, I wouldn’t exactly say cynical.But two people in a committed relationship expecting a child in a country where marriage equality is one of the top three political issues of our time… certainly had the potential for comment don’t you think?
Oh, and before I forget… you know that invitation I sent to you on Twitter over the weekend?… You know… the one asking you to come to our place for a family dinner, meet the wife and kids and tell us what rights we don’t deserve?

Some people thought I was being sarcastic. But I wasn’t. Not really.

You see, for years Jackie and I have beaten a path to the doors of politicians with views EVEN more right wing than yours seem to be, and we all managed to express our views without the need for a first aid kit or a dose of Valium. Some of them even managed to see that legal protection for each other and for our children and other families like ours would actually be a stabilising factor for the community. A “conservative value” even.

It’s less of an uphill battle these days because we have the weight of public opinion behind us. You’d have to be Rumplestiltskin to have missed the plethora of opinion polls saying, well pretty much “Just change the Marriage Act and get on with it”.

Like many others, I really felt for you when you implored people to stop giving you a hard time. It must have come as such a shock. Fourteen or so years ago when I started writing responses to your columns there weren’t as many people prepared to declare their hand as it were.

In what is obviously a shock to you, there was actually a big backlash. Really big.

You see, there are so few people still in the closet these days you can’t turn around in a major city or even a big country town without bumping into an “out” gay man or lesbian. We’re everywhere! And we don’t just sit in the background any more feeling hurt and angry and depressed at comments like we caused the London riots or we are bad for our children.
No, we fight back. We speak out. We don’t put up with unsubstantiated and hollow accusations that our reasonable expectation for respect and social justice is some sort of vendetta against well-meaning religious fundamentalists.

I must say, one of the things we could talk about at our dinner party is this other intriguing theory of yours:

“Sure, there are aberrations, and you can always find evils within traditional families, domestic violence and child abuse. But even this imperfect institution is better than the Hobbesian social chaos the children of the underclasses have been born into for the last 50 years.”

I can’t wait to hear how you worked through research to draw the conclusion that a child being beaten up or sexually abused is better off than one raised by a loving and secure single parent or two mothers or two fathers, or functional step-parents. That could be a social science breakthrough.

So just one question remains… red wine or white?

Lord Blackadder
18th August 2011, 09:02 PM
What a great response by Kerryn. She kept it dignified and to the point.

And she's right. Most Australians wish that the Government would just grow up already and change to Marriage Act to allow equality in marriage.