I'm A Bad Dad

What happened? I am out for a week and suddenly we are thrust back into the heady days of the Cleaver family?

What.
The.
Hell.

Apparently, because I do not provide for my family (that is to say that my wife goes to work and I stay home with the kids... and blog some too), I am not doing my fatherly duty. Observe the source of my ranting:

God intended a father to perform two primary functions in his responsibilities for his family: provision and protection.
...
God also designed that same physical strength in a man for the purpose of protecting one's family. In more crude times such protection was very physical and the threats were very real. Beastly predators both man and animal caused the father to take on the necessary skepticism, awareness, and wisdom that would serve as a bulwark, literally shielding his family from the horrors that awaited. With today's technology protecting one's family is easier, but no less important. Fathers can and should take all precaution necessary to know who their children are spending time with - online and in person, what curriculum the local school board is planning on teaching, and even as a general rule of thumb - something as simple as being the one to answer the door at night when an unannounced guests rings the bell.

Now, I can definitely get down with the protection part - as I would absolutely destroy anyone or anything that would cause harm to any member of my family. BUT, I would also argue that my wife would do the same - which contradicts the idea that only men are strong enough protect the family. Have you ever heard of adrenaline? Yeah. It gives the ability to kick ass to anyone - regardless of gender or position in the family.

But, my biggest beef with this column is the idea that men and women serve completely different purposes in the family. Granted, if a man is the breadwinner and the woman is the homemaker, these roles naturally complement each other. The same would be said of the converse. HOWEVER, I do not believe that these "roles" are preordained by God. If they are, then I am surely going to burn in hellfire for eternity.

Well, in all fairness, I may burn for other things too. But I digress...

What is so wrong with the idea that the woman could be the breadwinner and the man the homemaker? It occurs to me that Mr. McCullough thinks that anyone who has not "commit[ted] himself to being the breadwinning provider" for the family is a "slacker".

It is a moral and right thing for a man in his truest essence to commit himself to being the breadwinning provider for his home. Any man who seeks the hand of a woman in marriage who is not prepared for this responsibility should not be granted that honor. Because he is not yet truly a man. And women do themselves a tremendous disservice when they are willing to tie themselves down to such a slacker.

But what is even more disturbing to me is the idea that by tying the the person who is NOT the breadwinner (the homemaker) to the term "slacker" - i.e. I am a dad who stays at home, does not have a nine-to-five job, therefore I must be a "slacker" - insinuates that if a woman does not have a nine-to-five job, she too must be a "slacker".

You see, the major flaw in his "logic" is that his conclusions are drawn from his faith in God.

But there is another reason modern feminists reject a strong father today. It is rebellion against God - the ultimate father.

Feminists wish to subvert God's plan, order, and instruction in order to create a world that they see as the ultimate reality. A reality that is made in their own image. Scripture refers to that as idolatry.

Thusly feminists have gone to great lengths to show fathers as bumbling idiot boobs in pop culture. Some have gone to great lengths to insist that fathers are completely unnecessary to the future of this world. Some scientists have gone so far as to now attempt to eliminate the need for men all together.

Okay, first of all, I'd LOVE to see some proof of the feminist plot to transform the world into "a reality that is made in their own image." What does that mean anyway? Secondly, he is assuming that we are all Christians out here in the blogosphere. EHHH! Wrong. What does being a Christian - or a religious person in general - have to do with good parenting? Nada. Thirdly, could I see some examples of how "feminists have gone to great lengths to show fathers as bumbling idiot boobs in pop culture"? And for that matter, what is a "bumbling idiot boob"?

I would argue that this medical breakthrough that has Mr. McCullough's panties in a bunch is something in which lesbian couples (heaven forbid) might be interested. It is not to create a world without men. Someone needs to tell Ole' Kev that in the cable news business, they will use lines like that to grab your attention. This way, you will stay tuned throughout the commercial break to see what the story is. I'm guessing that after he slumped down in his chair and started opining about how men are great and the world would not be able to function without us, he did indeed stay tuned to see the story. It works.

Having made the joint decision with my wife some 19 months ago to assume the role of homemaker (although I've upgraded my title to "Director of Operations for the Pajama Household"), I feel that I'm completely qualified to tell you all that no slacker is fit to do this job. While my wife goes out into the workforce everyday (and I love her for it), I stay home and I cook meals, clean the house (as best I can) and most importantly - I chase two kids around all day. The only time that I get a break is during the p.m. naptime (which I then use to vent about things here).

I love what I do - and I would not hesitate to smack that smug jackass over at Townhall who claims that I'm a slacker.

Conclusions? The aforementioned jackass is simply that; a jackass. He is clearly afraid of progress, both in sex and in gender roles. If his faith and religion guide his life in the manner with which he speaks - I have no problem with that. However, it is ridonkulous rants like this that are widening the political polarization of America. For every quasi-intellectual moderate thinker like myself who reads McCullough's drivel, there are likely 10 right-wingers lined up to drink his brand of Kool-Aid. Scary indeed.

Oh, and he should stop referring to "feminists" in such a negative way. Feminism isn't about some outlandish plot to enslave men and take over the world - it's about the freedom to choose how to live your life.

filed in: Kevin McCullough, Religion, Republicanshare: