When “triparenting” goes bad

posted at 12:41 pm on February 16, 2016 by Jazz Shaw

Let’s take a break from the election news for a moment and visit a rather unusual family court case which played out in New Jersey last year. Eugene Volokh of The Volokh Conspiracy has a lengthy study at the WaPo of a case of triparenting gone bad in the Garden state which raises quite a few questions. If you’re like me, the first one to come to mind is, what the heck is triparenting? As the name would imply, it’s a case of three people acting as parents to a child and it’s now made its way into the legal system.

Let’s start with the thumbnail description of the principals and how it was resolved.

This case involves issues of custody, removal, and support surrounding an unusual agreement entered into between three friends to conceive and jointly raise a child in a tri-parenting arrangement. [Olivia] is a female minor child born in 2009. Plaintiff, [Doug], is the biological father of [Olivia], and [Kristine] is the child’s biological mother. Plaintiff, [Shawn], is [Doug]’s same-sex spouse, who has bonded with and has become a psychological parent of [Olivia]. . . . [T]he court awards joint legal and joint residential custody of [Olivia] to all three parties and denies the application of [Kristine] to remove and relocate the child to a different state.

So this was a situation where same-sex spouses Doug and Shawn were hanging out with their female friend Kristine and cooked up the idea of having a child together which they would all participate in raising. Kristine was obviously to be the mother and Doug was the, er… “donor” for the procedure which was accomplished at home via a turkey baster. The subsequently produced child, Olivia, was given Shawn’s last name. And for a while it seemed to work out, with the men each holding good jobs in Jersey and the mother taking Olivia back and forth between there and Costa Rica. They gained some notoriety and even landed television appearances and book deals to discuss their unique arrangement.

Then, things took a turn.

The turning point in the relationship and the beginning of the turmoil and acrimony stemmed from [Kristine]’s desire to relocate with the child to California. In March of 2013, when [Kristine] and the child returned from a trip to Costa Rica, [Doug and Shawn] learned that [Kristine] had fallen in love with her neighbor in Costa Rica, [Alan], who primarily resided in California. [Alan] had shared custody of his children with his ex-wife in California, which prevented him from relocating to New Jersey.

So now we’ve added a fourth person into the mix, resulting in a desire on the part of Kristine to flee the scene and go set up a new life with Alan out on the left coast. That’s when the courts had to finally step in and determine that the best interests of the child would be served by keeping her in Jersey with three parents, two of whom had good jobs, rather than sending her to California with a potentially unemployed mom and a guy who had no history with her.

Can we actually redefine the legal definition of “parenting” any way we wish? Apparently so, at least in New Jersey. And while this is another area where I run hard aground against traditional conservative orthodoxy, I’m not throwing the baby entirely out with the bathwater here. While I still believe that an ideal situation for a child generally consists of growing up in a stable home with a mother and father serving as role models for their respective genders, I still feel that any safe, secure, home free of dangers to the youngsters is better than being a ward of the state. Single parents can provide a good home, even if the challenges are greater (think of the many widows and widowers out there) and gay couples can do so as well.

Three parents just strikes me as confusing for the kid and further complicates the already treacherous landscape of trying to grow up and adapt to the adult world. Intentionally entering into such a scheme doesn’t seem to do the child any favors when other, more conventional and stable options are available. (And the inherent instability baked into such a relationship seems to have been on full display in this case.) But once the child has arrived in the world there’s not much left in the way of options. She has to live someplace and it’s preferable that it be in a good home with the type of income required to provide for her basic, physical needs and prepare for her education and future.

This looks like a rough road ahead for Olivia, but at least she’s not out on the streets. Still, there may be a lesson here for others who view parenthood as some sort of modern experiment in social science. Sometime the boring old traditional ways work out best for a reason.

FamilyLaw


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Yeah. 80% of black families with no fathers isn’t the problem.

Its structural racism in progressives cities.

Ok then.

gwelf on February 16, 2016 at 3:25 PM

Gee, I wonder if the high rates of black male imprisonment, caused in large part by racism, could have had any connection to the lack of fathers? You choose to focus on a symptom. I choose to focus on the disease.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 3:42 PM

You did outline it.
Maybe you’re just ignorant of it.

gwelf on February 16, 2016 at 3:28 PM

I really don’t think I did. But why don’t you go ahead and define what you mean by cultural marxism then?

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 3:43 PM

^tlaloc sweetie, I know you ain’t that stupid.

Maybe you are.

cozmo on February 16, 2016 at 3:44 PM

Tlaloc, a what you mentioned wasn’t a harem, but a single male herd. Even then, the kind of harem you are imagining has only been held by kings.

Count to 10 on February 16, 2016 at 3:45 PM

^tlaloc sweetie, I know you ain’t that stupid.

Maybe you are.

cozmo on February 16, 2016 at 3:44 PM

It’d be novel if you actually made a cogent argument, for once. Here’s a hint, it involves you making a claim and then defending it. It doesn’t involve you making random claims with no connection to anything previously said (as you have been doing).

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 3:47 PM

Tlaloc, a what you mentioned wasn’t a harem, but a single male herd. Even then, the kind of harem you are imagining has only been held by kings.

Count to 10 on February 16, 2016 at 3:45 PM

I didn’t say anything about there being only a single male. Quite the contrary, I said the dominant male would try to prevent the other males from breeding with the females.

You were the one who insisted we saw no examples of this kind of behavior in society, don’t complain when I prove your argument wrong.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 3:49 PM

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 3:47 PM

Okay, you are that stupid. We started out pretty much on the same side of this argument (I felt kind of icky being there)and then you went off on so many goofy tangents you ain’t even close to the original subject.

cozmo on February 16, 2016 at 3:52 PM

God help Olivia because none of these other idiots will.

leader4hru on February 16, 2016 at 3:53 PM

When is the FB thingy happenin’ cuz I’d hate my last post on HA to be about a turkey baster party. Now that’s creative.

Kissmygrits on February 16, 2016 at 3:55 PM

Okay, you are that stupid. We started out pretty much on the same side of this argument (I felt kind of icky being there)and then you went off on so many goofy tangents you ain’t even close to the original subject.

cozmo on February 16, 2016 at 3:52 PM

So you aren’t going to even try to make a cogent argument? Pity.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 4:01 PM

To what you frickin’ moron? You’ve so messed up the field, nobody knows where the goals are any more.

cozmo on February 16, 2016 at 4:03 PM

but it is where the responsiblity for parenting begins.

billintex on February 16, 2016 at 3:24 PM

According to our cultural construct, not nature.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 3:41 PM

gibbons: primate as you as so fond of pointing out as the human genus, and known to mate for life. so, yes. Nature. Too often pop psychology over the years has gone to great lengths to push the idea that humans are not monogamous I believe to ease the guilt and stigma felt by those who do not make their relationships work. It’s easier to walk away if its “normal” and the effects it has on the children are dismissed too readily.

billintex on February 16, 2016 at 4:07 PM

This looks like a rough road ahead for Olivia, but at least she’s not out on the street.

Not now, perhaps, but give her 15 more years and not only is she likely to be out on the street but she’ll be “tatted”, pierced, and a cutter as well.

I have friends who deal with the young homeless in New York City and most of them are runaways from dysfunctional family situations. It’s not enough to provide the material comforts of a housing situation, there are psychological and spiritual needs that these self-absorbed “parents” are denying this child and she will suffer her entire life because of it.

Cleombrotus on February 16, 2016 at 4:11 PM

To what you frickin’ moron? You’ve so messed up the field, nobody knows where the goals are any more.

cozmo on February 16, 2016 at 4:03 PM

So now you want me to tell you what your position is? Shouldn’t you have some sense of that before you post?

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 4:11 PM

gibbons: primate as you as so fond of pointing out as the human genus, and known to mate for life. so, yes. Nature. Too often pop psychology over the years has gone to great lengths to push the idea that humans are not monogamous I believe to ease the guilt and stigma felt by those who do not make their relationships work. It’s easier to walk away if its “normal” and the effects it has on the children are dismissed too readily.

billintex on February 16, 2016 at 4:07 PM

Humans aren’t naturally monogamous. That gibbons may be (I haven’t bothered to check) means nothing. Primates exhibit a number of breeding strategies.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 4:15 PM

Gee, I wonder if the high rates of black male imprisonment, caused in large part by racism, could have had any connection to the lack of fathers? You choose to focus on a symptom. I choose to focus on the disease.
Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 3:42 PM

Gee, I wonder if Tlaloc actually thinks about what he posts before he does it.

His question would be easily answered if he just compared the fatherless rate between today, when there is practically zero institutionalized racism in society and, say, the 1950’s when there was plenty of it.

Goofball.

Cleombrotus on February 16, 2016 at 4:19 PM

Gee, I wonder if Tlaloc actually thinks about what he posts before he does it.

Cleombrotus on February 16, 2016 at 4:19 PM

Really, there are so many more intersting things to wonder about.

Besides, tlaloc ain’t a person. He’s an experiment. They couldn’t afford an infinite number of monkeys, just four. And they share a single keyboard.

cozmo on February 16, 2016 at 4:24 PM

Don’t tri this at home.
Flange

Cleombrotus on February 16, 2016 at 4:25 PM

Primates exhibit a number of breeding strategies.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 4:15 PM

and yet you attempt to lock humans into the singular polygamist category? it seems that historically, as human cultures evolve (mature?) the trend is away from polygamy to monogamy. this is in conjunction with most developing societies being rather conservative in nature, usually adopting and promoting a particular set of values. when these cultures peak and diversification of culture sets in, competing and oft non compatible values weaken the structure hence the polygamy you seem to accept as the norm is actually a breakdown in the cohesive family unit. Polygamy amongst humans can be seen as either a primitive (socially immature) behavior in proto cultures or as a harbinger of the fall of a once higher society.

billintex on February 16, 2016 at 4:25 PM

Gee, I wonder if Tlaloc actually thinks about what he posts before he does it.

His question would be easily answered if he just compared the fatherless rate between today, when there is practically zero institutionalized racism in society and, say, the 1950’s when there was plenty of it.

Goofball.

Cleombrotus on February 16, 2016 at 4:19 PM

So you also are trying to argue that sexual liberation (i.e. birth control) somehow caused the current state of black families in urban america, as opposed to say the decades of racism that led to their confinement within urban gulags where crime was one of the few ways to actually make money?

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 4:26 PM

cozmo on February 16, 2016 at 4:24 PM

I will bet money that his family life had something to do with it. Probably everything to do with it.

Cleombrotus on February 16, 2016 at 4:27 PM

So you also are trying to argue that sexual liberation (i.e. birth control) somehow caused the current state of black families in urban america, as opposed to say the decades of racism that led to their confinement within urban gulags where crime was one of the few ways to actually make money?

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 4:26 PM

Sorry, but the current status of the black community can’t be laid entirely at the door of racism.

There are far more facets to it than that, Tlaloc.

lineholder on February 16, 2016 at 4:32 PM

Tlaloc on February 16

Tlaloc, let me tell you something. In the early 1970’s, I and some friends moved to center city Baltimore. We were new Christians with a lot of zeal so we’d go out everyday – I mean everyday – talking to the kids in the streets of inner city Baltimore. One thing we found was that, unless you ran into a Nation of Islam goon, the blacks were the group of people you could almost always get a respectful hearing from. They didn’t always agree with us but they, more than any other subgroup of young Americans recognized something in what we were saying and responded accordingly.

That’s no longer the case.

That change in their worldview and the resultant change in their social opportunities wasn’t the result of white racism but of black race hustlers telling them that anything that had to do with the white man was designed to hold them down and they needed to embrace their own unique ethnic culture.

THAT’S why the black subculture is so damned dysfunctional today.

Cleombrotus on February 16, 2016 at 4:36 PM

The natural order of things: two parents; one male one female. the rest is unnatural.

billintex on February 16, 2016 at 1:43 PM

No, you’re flat wrong. Naturally our species lives in clans where a dominant male mates with multiple females and prevents the other males from breeding with any. Child rearing is done by the clan as a whole but primarily by the mother.

That’s our nature. But of course there’s no reason we have to be tied to that.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 2:35 PM

Even if we take as writ your claim that primitive humans acted like an elk herd with respect to mating privlidges (which is rather dubious once you even get to the first Homo Sapiens), that still ignores that in order to move beyond purly nomadic lifestyles and actually develop, what was it called again, oh yes, civilization that pair bonding had to become the rule and other arrangements the exception. Anything else and civilization would have collapsed before it ever really started.

In that sense, I suppose, it could be called a “social construct” but only becuase it allowed for society to develop at all.

sumpnz on February 16, 2016 at 4:42 PM

If all of the problems within the black community can be blamed on external racism, then the problems are hopeless because bigotry and prejudice are simply part of the human condition. By concentrating on supposed structural racism, leftists like Tlaloc move forward their agenda of remaking society, instead of focusing on those things which would eliminate social pathologies, things which would actually improve the lot of bl black Americans.

But then for leftists like Tlaloc it’s not about improving folks’ lives it’s about controlling those lives.

rokemronnie on February 16, 2016 at 4:43 PM

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 3:42 PM

Racism – in liberal democrat societies – often time with minorities in the power structure of said liberal democrat societies? That’s rich.

Why are their so many single black women/ For the same reason there are increasingly so many poorer white single women. The govt welfare state has created an environment where the poorer men are no longer worth the poorer women’s time. So the men never marry – and get involved in drug or gang wars that eventually land them in prison.

If you wiped out most of welfare for able bodied young adults, most of this would reverse itself. Not all. But most.

Zomcon JEM on February 16, 2016 at 4:57 PM

It’d be novel if you actually made a cogent argument, for once. Here’s a hint, it involves you making a claim and then defending it. It doesn’t involve you making random claims with no connection to anything previously said (as you have been doing).

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 3:47 PM

Tialoc’s Dictionary, 1st edition:

cogent
adjective co·gent \ˈkō-jənt\
Simple Definition of cogent
1 : Pulling something out of your ass and smearing it around, followed by brow-beating anyone who doesn’t like the smell of it.

Shepherd Lover on February 16, 2016 at 5:16 PM

Humans aren’t naturally monogamous. That gibbons may be (I haven’t bothered to check) means nothing. Primates exhibit a number of breeding strategies.
.
Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 4:15 PM

.
Lookout, Tlaloc … here comes God

Ever since the fall of man, in the ‘Garden Of Eden’, and then even more so, after Noah’s flood, what is “natural” has been … perverted and corrupted … and is no longer NORMAL, in the way the Intelligent Designer originally intended.

One of the most confusing mistakes on the part of Christian believers, is to use the two words interchangeably, as if they mean the same thing.

listens2glenn on February 16, 2016 at 5:17 PM

Sorry, but the current status of the black community can’t be laid entirely at the door of racism.

There are far more facets to it than that, Tlaloc.

lineholder on February 16, 2016 at 4:32 PM

Probably not entirely, no. You’re right that life is rarely so tidy. But mostly? Yeah, I think so.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 5:28 PM

That’s no longer the case.

That change in their worldview and the resultant change in their social opportunities wasn’t the result of white racism but of black race hustlers telling them that anything that had to do with the white man was designed to hold them down and they needed to embrace their own unique ethnic culture.

THAT’S why the black subculture is so damned dysfunctional today.

Cleombrotus on February 16, 2016 at 4:36 PM

Yes, I’m sure the rejection of your fairy tales is the primary cause of all social dysfunction.

Do I need the ‘sarcasm’ tag?

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 5:30 PM

Here’s a hint, it involves you making a claim and then defending it. It doesn’t involve you making random claims with no connection to anything previously said.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 3:47 PM

You first.

Watching you admonish people to stand by what they say is an eternal fount of amusement.

The Schaef on February 16, 2016 at 5:39 PM

Even if we take as writ your claim that primitive humans acted like an elk herd with respect to mating privlidges (which is rather dubious once you even get to the first Homo Sapiens), that still ignores that in order to move beyond purly nomadic lifestyles and actually develop, what was it called again, oh yes, civilization that pair bonding had to become the rule and other arrangements the exception. Anything else and civilization would have collapsed before it ever really started.

In that sense, I suppose, it could be called a “social construct” but only becuase it allowed for society to develop at all.

sumpnz on February 16, 2016 at 4:42 PM

Again, not true. There are plenty of examples of alternate social constructs that took root. As just one example, there are societies where all the men reside in one structure and the women and children in separate homes (the Awa of New Guinea for instance).

You think this way because it happens to be the dominant cultural mode of the society you grew up in, but the truth is it is not universal.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 5:42 PM

Naturally our species lives in clans where a dominant male mates with multiple females and prevents the other males from breeding with any.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 2:35 PM

Wherein the same person who ridicules people for living their life by the edicts of some “Bronze-Age goatherds” recommends we abandon civilized monogamy in basing or family structure on those of Bronze-Age goatherds.

The Schaef on February 16, 2016 at 5:42 PM

If all of the problems within the black community can be blamed on external racism, then the problems are hopeless because bigotry and prejudice are simply part of the human condition. By concentrating on supposed structural racism, leftists like Tlaloc move forward their agenda of remaking society, instead of focusing on those things which would eliminate social pathologies, things which would actually improve the lot of bl black Americans.

But then for leftists like Tlaloc it’s not about improving folks’ lives it’s about controlling those lives.

rokemronnie on February 16, 2016 at 4:43 PM

Racism is a part of our nature but we don’t have to follow that impulse nor do we have to let it become systemic. You want to ignore the actual issue to focus on your pet peeves which will do nothing to help blacks but not coincidentally do help cement white power over blacks. Funny, that.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 5:44 PM

If you wiped out most of welfare for able bodied young adults, most of this would reverse itself. Not all. But most.

Zomcon JEM on February 16, 2016 at 4:57 PM

Case in point, you hate welfare so despite the fact that it helps the poor you try to pretend it hurts them so you can attack it while not being open about the truth.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 5:46 PM

Lookout, Tlaloc … here comes God…

Ever since the fall of man, in the ‘Garden Of Eden’, and then even more so, after Noah’s flood, what is “natural” has been … perverted and corrupted … and is no longer NORMAL, in the way the Intelligent Designer originally intended.

One of the most confusing mistakes on the part of Christian believers, is to use the two words interchangeably, as if they mean the same thing.

listens2glenn on February 16, 2016 at 5:17 PM

Well ‘god’ hasn’t bothered to do anything about it so I’m going to assume either it doesn’t exist or it’s completely cool with this ‘perversion and corruption.’

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 5:48 PM

Probably not entirely, no. You’re right that life is rarely so tidy. But mostly? Yeah, I think so.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 5:28 PM

I don’t think so, but you may be right.

Eight years ago, I had every confidence in the world that, if given the chance, people in the black community would choose work and building a better life for themselves, if they just had the opportunity. And the lack of opportunity wasn’t so much about racism as it was that a significant number of people in the black community (collectively speaking) lived in inner city areas (the bulk of government housing is in inner city areas); inner city areas were lacking in job opportunities (businesses just don’t want to take the higher economic risk of opening up a business in inner city areas), etc. That’s part of the reason that I was a big fan of Herman Cain, because he was the closest we had come since Kemp on finding a way to bring business opportunities back to inner city areas.

Good for the black community. Reduce dependency on welfare programs. I just saw it in a positive light.

But I’ve become convinced that a lot of them don’t want a life beyond the safety and security of the welfare system, Tlaloc. Government has treated them as substandard citizens, and they’ve bought into thinking that little of themselves. The Teachers Unions have put the security of the Union ahead of the education of students, especially those in inner city areas. School choice is a great option, but it isn’t getting the backing it needs to really start moving some obstacles out of the way.

And I’m white. Plenty of times I’ve heard “Oh, you white….you don’t know nothing about being black”…..I might not know anything about being black, but I do know what it is to be POOR. I understand that one better than they might realize.

Lots of facets to it. Layers upon layers of them. Racism would only be one piece of the puzzle.

lineholder on February 16, 2016 at 5:48 PM

despite the fact that it helps the poor

You know, like Medicaid…

you try to pretend it hurts them so you can attack it while not being open about the truth.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 5:46 PM

Your irony meter must be turned to 11 today…

The Schaef on February 16, 2016 at 5:49 PM

Well ‘god’ hasn’t bothered to do anything about it so I’m going to assume either it doesn’t exist or it’s completely cool with this ‘perversion and corruption.’

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 5:48 PM

Is there anything in this world that you consider to be perverse or corrupt to any degree?

The Schaef on February 16, 2016 at 5:50 PM

And I’m white. Plenty of times I’ve heard “Oh, you white….you don’t know nothing about being black”…..I might not know anything about being black, but I do know what it is to be POOR. I understand that one better than they might realize.

lineholder on February 16, 2016 at 5:48 PM

Oh, the only time progs acknowledge that a white person can be poor, is when they think opposition to welfare programs is racially-based, and want to have a chuckle at themselves that all them dumb white folks are hurting all them poor white folks in their misguided attempts to lash out at all them poor black folks.

The Schaef on February 16, 2016 at 5:55 PM

Yeah. 80% of black families with no fathers isn’t the problem.

Its structural racism in progressives cities.

Ok then.

gwelf on February 16, 2016 at 3:25 PM

Gee, I wonder if the high rates of black male imprisonment, caused in large part by racism, could have had any connection to the lack of fathers? You choose to focus on a symptom. I choose to focus on the disease.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 3:42 PM

Uh, you’ve got all of your facts wrong.

go google jason riley

or thomas sowell (oh, I almost forgot, you totally ignore the government produced facts sowell mentions because you misread someone who had a minor disagreement with sowell in WaPo).

But please, keep pushing the argument that it’s progressive cities to blame for the institutional racism.

gwelf on February 16, 2016 at 5:55 PM

Oh, so the “mother” fell in love with somebody else! Out with the old, in with the new.

And the whole deal is falling apart after 3 years? I’m shocked.

Good luck, Olivia, you poor child.

PattyJ on February 16, 2016 at 5:56 PM

Gee, I wonder if the high rates of black male imprisonment, caused in large part by racism, could have had any connection to the lack of fathers? You choose to focus on a symptom. I choose to focus on the disease.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 3:42 PM

Also look up Theodore Dalrymple. He found ALL of the same outcomes in issues…in the UK. So, even if you take out ALL possibility of racism – structural or otherwise – from the equation but keep all of the same deterioration of the family structure then you get exactly what we have here.

gwelf on February 16, 2016 at 5:59 PM

But I’ve become convinced that a lot of them don’t want a life beyond the safety and security of the welfare system, Tlaloc.

lineholder on February 16, 2016 at 5:48 PM

I think you’re viewing it backwards. They’ve been so regularly discriminated against that they are
A) very attached to one of the very few benefits that do get out of US society
B) unwilling to often risk pursuing an american dream which is mostly illusory for whites and much more so for minorities
C) distrustful of anyone who says they should get off welfare as someone who is trying to rob them of one more thing

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 6:00 PM

THAT’S why the black subculture is so damned dysfunctional today.

Cleombrotus on February 16, 2016 at 4:36 PM

I wonder if Facebook will allow honest dialogue like that to stand when they take over, or if it will be deemed ‘racist!!!’ and replaced with ‘comment deleted…’

pannw on February 16, 2016 at 6:01 PM

But please, keep pushing the argument that it’s progressive cities to blame for the institutional racism.

gwelf on February 16, 2016 at 5:55 PM

Perhaps you should learn to read before you attempt writing.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 6:02 PM

Again, not true. There are plenty of examples of alternate social constructs that took root. As just one example, there are societies where all the men reside in one structure and the women and children in separate homes (the Awa of New Guinea for instance).

You think this way because it happens to be the dominant cultural mode of the society you grew up in, but the truth is it is not universal.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 5:42 PM

And nothing in your link actually supports you point. Yeah, the women in that culture live in seperate huts. They still got married to 1 man, and nothing – in that link – indicated the local strong man got his way with all the local women while shutting out the other men from access.

While you might eventually be able to find some obscure community that has persisted for a long period of time behaving the way you insist is the “natural” norm, those will represent peoples that have not advanced technologically on their own past the stone age. There’s a lesson in that, somewhere.

sumpnz on February 16, 2016 at 6:02 PM

They’ve been told that they are so regularly discriminated against that they are psychologically conditioned to believe that they cannot accomplish anything unless the white people in power help them.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 6:00 PM

Fixed.

The Schaef on February 16, 2016 at 6:04 PM

Statistically, just as many screwed up kids come from nuclear households.

cozmo on February 16, 2016 at 2:59 PM

Complete BS on the numbers. Everyone who has any intellectual curiosity knows that children from intact nuclear families do better on virtually every metric you choose to measure than children from broken/alternative families. You’re either ignorant or lying. Which is it?

xNavigator on February 16, 2016 at 6:06 PM

But please, keep pushing the argument that it’s progressive cities to blame for the institutional racism.

gwelf on February 16, 2016 at 5:55 PM

Perhaps you should learn to read before you attempt writing.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 6:02 PM

You resort to this dodging when you can’t respond.

Black communities pushed for tougher criminal action in cities because they hated living in crime infested hell holes. Were they hoodwinked by institutional racism?
And progressive cities seem perfectly capable of ignoring immigration laws – you’re telling me that progressive cities and states cannot control the police department (the ones throwing all these black fathers in prison).
Your claim is also laughable because these supposed stand up fathers (being unjustly incarcerated and kept from their parenting duties) have taken full advantage of what you call “sexual liberation” and often father multiple children with multiple mothers. Did institutional racism do that too?
Is it turtles all the way down?

You don’t really know what you’re talking about.

gwelf on February 16, 2016 at 6:07 PM

I have heard this mentioned once on TV.

In the sixties, the democrats passed a law that no aid to dependent children could be given if a man were in the house or family.

At the time, my husband and I said: can you hear the “whoosh” of men leaving so their families could get public assistance.

Today is the result..not pretty is it.

mollymack on February 16, 2016 at 6:08 PM

Gee, I wonder if the high rates of black male imprisonment, caused in large part by racism, could have had any connection to the lack of fathers? You choose to focus on a symptom. I choose to focus on the disease.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 3:42 PM

I think you’re viewing it backwards. They’ve been so regularly discriminated against that they are
A) very attached to one of the very few benefits that do get out of US society
B) unwilling to often risk pursuing an american dream which is mostly illusory for whites and much more so for minorities
C) distrustful of anyone who says they should get off welfare as someone who is trying to rob them of one more thing

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 6:00 PM

But remember everyone – Tlaloc has no idea what Cultural Marxism or critial theory is. He just magically spouts it’s most tired and debunked cliche’s.

gwelf on February 16, 2016 at 6:09 PM

I think you’re viewing it backwards. They’ve been so regularly discriminated against that they are
A) very attached to one of the very few benefits that do get out of US society
B) unwilling to often risk pursuing an american dream which is mostly illusory for whites and much more so for minorities
C) distrustful of anyone who says they should get off welfare as someone who is trying to rob them of one more thing

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 6:00 PM

No, I’m viewing it from the context of someone who has watched friends get sucked down into our welfare system and can’t find a way out of it. It’s designed that way.

I was tempted to follow that path myself but decided not to. I had my car, which served as a roof over my head, and it let me drive to where there was work. I worked a minimum wage job, which kept food in my mouth. I lived out of a Walmart parking lot. Plenty of people still doing that.

One of the biggest challenges about being poor is what it does to your sense of self-worth. And then when you rely on someone else (such as government) all the time, you never push yourself and build confidence back and reestablish that sense of worth and value (which no one is going to do for you).

If it stays that way long enough, you just become acclimated to that way of life, and thinking little of yourself, and asking little of yourself.

I do understand how that can be obstacle in a person’s life, and how difficult it is to overcome, too.

That’s not about how external influences impact your life…it’s how you choose to respond to those external influences. You can either overcome them or you can let them control your life and dictate who you become.

That isn’t a situation that is confined by parameters like race, Tlaloc.

lineholder on February 16, 2016 at 6:11 PM

If this is my last post before the facebookening – I wish all of you the best. Even you Tlaloc.

I apologize if I wasn’t always as civil as I should be.

gwelf on February 16, 2016 at 6:16 PM

gwelf on February 16, 2016 at 6:16 PM

I’m in a similar frame of mind, gwelf.

Once they go to FB, I won’t be posting. I don’t do politics on FB. It’s just too risky for me, job wise, and I’ve worked to hard to get this far. So, I’ll find another site where I can keep anonymity.

If this is my last one, best of success to all and sundry.

May God bless and keep you.

lineholder on February 16, 2016 at 6:19 PM

And nothing in your link actually supports you point. Yeah, the women in that culture live in seperate huts. They still got married to 1 man, and nothing – in that link – indicated the local strong man got his way with all the local women while shutting out the other men from access.

While you might eventually be able to find some obscure community that has persisted for a long period of time behaving the way you insist is the “natural” norm, those will represent peoples that have not advanced technologically on their own past the stone age. There’s a lesson in that, somewhere.

sumpnz on February 16, 2016 at 6:02 PM

The lesson is that you should stop assuming our culture is universal. It isn’t. And the fact that we rose to technological dominance doesn’t make mean our way of living is inherently better. It also doesn’t make it inherently worse. It’s just different.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 6:20 PM

You resort to this dodging when you can’t respond.

What was there to respond to, you misstated my argument on purpose. I slapped you for it. Now you’re whining. That brings us up to date.

You don’t really know what you’re talking about.

gwelf on February 16, 2016 at 6:07 PM

Funny I was just thinking the same thing about you.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 6:22 PM

I have heard this mentioned once on TV.

mollymack on February 16, 2016 at 6:08 PM

Not everything said on TV is actually true.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 6:23 PM

That isn’t a situation that is confined by parameters like race, Tlaloc.

lineholder on February 16, 2016 at 6:11 PM

If you mean it isn’t exclusive to minorities then I mostly agree. In fact I used to think that classism played a bigger role than racism. Now I think I underestimated the impact of racism because I come from a progressive area. The last few years have been enormously enlightening to just how much brutal racism resides in US society.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 6:25 PM

Yes, I’m sure the rejection of your fairy tales is the primary cause of all social dysfunction.
Do I need the ‘sarcasm’ tag?
Tlaloc on February

Yeah, it figures that your myopic fear of moral absolutes would cause you to miss the point entirely.

My point had little to do with Chriistianity. I only included that to give you some explanation for why we were there.
The point is that, yes, it IS because of racism that the social problems exist in the black community but it’s because of BLACK racism, goofy, not white.

But you go on believing your OWN fairy tales if they make YOU feel good.

Cleombrotus on February 16, 2016 at 6:29 PM

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 6:25 PM

I’m not going to say that racism doesn’t exist.

But I think it’s used as a mental crutch more than it needs to be Tlaloc. I’d love to be proved wrong about that, but the last few years have convinced me otherwise.

Going to get some dinner. Have a good evening!

lineholder on February 16, 2016 at 6:30 PM

My point had little to do with Chriistianity. I only included that to give you some explanation for why we were there.
The point is that, yes, it IS because of racism that the social problems exist in the black community but it’s because of BLACK racism, goofy, not white.

Cleombrotus on February 16, 2016 at 6:29 PM

Well it sure came across as ‘if only those silly blacks would listen to us god fearing whites they could be civilized!’ Given the history of christianity you can hopefully see where that might be a tad touchy.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 6:34 PM

I’m not going to say that racism doesn’t exist.

But I think it’s used as a mental crutch more than it needs to be Tlaloc. I’d love to be proved wrong about that, but the last few years have convinced me otherwise.

Going to get some dinner. Have a good evening!

lineholder on February 16, 2016 at 6:30 PM

re the bolded part- for me too, but I’d guess we’d point to very different examples. Vaya con dios.

Tlaloc on February 16, 2016 at 6:35 PM

Comment pages: 1 2