Timkins , I can't say that I have any interest in artificial wombs. I promote and advocate marriage and reconciliation between men and women - including LOVE - that word that we have been accused of not using within our 350 word quoter. If men (and women) continue to avoid the marriage commitment then those that push gender separatism will have achieved their goal.

I just don't think that such reconciliation can happen unless men can voice their concerns about the state of affairs without fear of misandrist attack. Reconciliation will be assisted when both genders address the political and social forces that oppose their loving union or inflame tension, and join forces to resist those that attempt to social engineer our culture in into their own ideological nightmare - ie. the fatherless society.

I agree with Robert - the woman's movement is currently fractured, and many women have protested the movement's hijacking by radical separatists. I am very supportive of the equity feminists - as they seek equality rather than domination. One example is Wendy McElroy at ifeminist: http://www.ifeminists.net/index.php

The more contemporary Equity Feminists are not fairly represented by the media and it would be ideal if contemporary women's movement worked with the men's movement to expose the political cronies of old fashioned Separatism.

As to the personal attacks by Ringtail and garra - I admit that these hurt - particularly ringtails cursing of my new marriage, and garra's unintelligible criticism of my admitting parenthood. I thought that parenthood was pretty well on topic with Daniel's article??

But both Ringtail and garra have relied on ridicule, slur, and vicious presumption rather than intelligent critique of the content of the message string. While speeding through some glassy tubes today I decide that they don't warrant reply

S/surfer, I do apologise for my comments stating that you give fatherhood a bad name - I wouldn't know if you are a good father or not. However I stand by my comments about 'leading your wife'. I keep getting a visual image of a cow with a ring in her nose!

You either walk with your wife/partner side by side or you walk alone. Maybe this is way so many men are afraid of fatherhood - they think they should lead and women don't want to be led. I don't really believe that.

Women/feminists are not one homgenised group with the same opinion/agenda. Quelle surprise. Just like men we have differences of opinion. Once again stating bleeding obvious. Therefore, we are just as fractured a group as are men. Maybe this is what scares young men - women are variable. I don't believe that either. Not all men are that stupid.

I go back to positive support, role models, self esteem and confidence. A man who believes in himself and sees women as people too has nothing to fear.

Ringtail, thanks for the apology.

If you have a visual image you should 'own' it - it does not fit my family experience at all. I discussed relationship roles with my wife for a long time before marrying (and tested the relationship dynamics). This included issues of leadership. She is a bold strong woman who rejects and hates (her words) the victim status assigned to woman by decades of gender separatist ideology.

She can speak for herself - so here she is … "My image of our marriage is one of holding hands with each other to face life together. When I disagree with my husband we can discuss and change direction together. I respect the differences between men and women and there are some areas that my husband can give me guidance on. I give him guidance on other areas that I am skilled in. I want a man who has leadership qualities. That does not mean that he is always pulling me around by a 'ring in the nose'. But through his wisdom, and strength can provide direction and protection for my family when needed."

Back to me - Silversurfer - my wife is completely cognisant with the issues of the fatherless society that I have touched on previously. In fact she runs a web site and participates in a forum that attracts a lot of request for help and information from 'second wives' who are trying to help their husband survive the devastating impact of forced separation from their children - ongoing legal battles, false accusations, Parent Alienation Syndrome, and offcourse the poverty brought about by legal battles and CSA harassment

Robert, Silversurfer
I would agree that marriage is best, but at the same time there should be continuing research into the male pill and artificial womb. Both will help liberate men from any exploitation, manipulation or blackmailing by a woman, simply because she has a natural womb.

Single male parent families are now the fastest growing family type in the US, and studies into those families have shown that they are generally better than single female parent families, despite minimal support being given to the father.

So for a child:- being born from an artificial womb to a single male parent family is likely to be better than being born to a single female parent family.

The gender feminist’s version of a family is a single female parent family with the mother blackmailing the father for child support while being on welfare and having a series of transient affairs with other men. This model has been running for about 30 yrs and the results have been a large scale social disaster. There has been a decline in marriage to a record low and a decline in the birth rate to below replacement levels, but at the same time a major increase in welfare, high levels of abortion, child poverty, child abuse etc. A complete social disaster.

So if marriage cannot be resurrected then the next best option would be to go for the artificial womb and single male parent families. Continuation of the gender feminist’s version of a family is really not an option for much longer, as society will either run out of children or run out of money for the welfare payments

Ringy, where in the world do you get this idea that male female relationships which are not culturally your cuppa, mean a man views a woman as less of a human being ?

Islam has indeed institutionalized such a view, but the Christian concept of Christ\husbands\Wives\Children is not a value judgement on the humanity of women. (believe it or not)

I lwill define my concepts about leadership in the family, and then relate it to fatherhood - the original topic of discussion.

Pop culture promotes an image of leadership that is focused on control and power. A more spiritual definition of leadership positions the leader as a servant. An example of this type of leadership is represented by Gandi and Jesus. Therefore leadership involves selflessness and sacrifice. I have talked with many women who are crying out for strong men who can be this type of leader in the family.

To take this back to the original theme of Daniel's article, kids also need leadership, and when a father commits himself to providing this, and is supported by his wife to do so, the children thrive on the sense of security and direction that a man can bring.

A lack of support by the female partner for the father's role, and appropriate leadership undermines the family unit. Gender separatist ideology exerts a lot of pressure on relationships here. It defines all relationships in terms of power balance and attributes a pathological deficiency to men - the need to control (among other favourites like pathologically prone violence). I reject this sort of stereotyping, and its totalitarian roots. I have met both male and female control freaks.

But the ideology of male pathological deficiency is propagated by separatists and consumed by the public, and therefore the community gives young men the message that it is politically incorrect to show masculine leadership qualities in relationships, or to undertake the same with their children. This message contributes further mass psychological pressure to the already pervasive political and legal forces that cause men to rightfully fear fatherhood.

In this sort of culture it is simply not a safe environment for fatherhood - politically, legally, and in the home - that is if your partner undermines your role.

If we want to encourage young men to enter fatherhood we must address the social and political disincentives rather than placing even more blame on the men. This will only enforce the destructive propaganda of male pathological deficiency.