the tindog coffeehouse

A few months ago, I wrote a blog post about defining “manhood”. I concluded that manhood couldn’t simply be reduced to biological or emotional maturation, but that it was the result of a conscious choice to take responsibility for our lives.

Newsweek, however, has a slightly different definition.

According to the liberal scribes at Newsweek, it’s time for a “New Macho”, where men are more likely to be stay-at-home dads or have jobs traditionally dominated by women such as teachers or nurses. They point to Sweden as a role model due to their mandatory paid paternity leave laws. (Never mind that Sweden has one of the highest rates of out-of-wedlock births in the world or that Swedish men are often forced to pee sitting down in order to squash their masculinity.)

Continue reading…

Father’s Day may just be another holiday manufactured by the greeting card companies (and sponsored by Home Depot), but it could just be the key to ending poverty as we know it.

According to a new study by the Heritage Foundation, having a married father in the household “has the same effect in reducing poverty as adding five to six years to a parent’s education level”:

Continue reading…

Like a lot kids, I grew up without a father around. My parents divorced when I was six, and my dad moved out of town for work a couple of years later. I still kept in touch with him as I grew up, but it was hard not having him in my day-to-day life. I’ve struggled most of my life to figure out what it takes to be a man, what it means to be a husband and a father. And I think it’s fair to say that at some point in his life, every man wrestles with those same questions, wondering whether he’s good enough or strong enough or smart enough or whatever. The problem is, we don’t really have a good way to determine that.

Continue reading…

“May you live all the days of your life.”
- Jonathan Swift

A friend of mine posted the following list of items on his blog recently, a checklist of things “completed or experienced,” and I was surprised at the number of items he was able to check off.

(I’ve removed his comments.)

Continue reading…

According to Maria Sophia Aguirre, an economics professor at Washington DC’s Catholic University of America, families with married parents are not only more beneficial to the overall health and development of the children, they are necessary for good economic development.

Aguirre noted, “the breakdown of the family is a symptom of a sick and weak society.”

Problems of all sorts increase in irregular families: Women are more likely to be abused, kids are more likely to use drugs, and women and children of broken families have a higher probability of living in poverty. …

Giving a review of nations ranging from Canada to Chile, the economist concluded that families are simply better for the economy.

“The breakdown of the family damages the economy and society since human, moral and social capital is reduced and social costs increase,” she explained.

Continue reading…

A new study indicates that divorced and single parents are costing U.S. taxpayers about $112 billion a year.

Scafidi’s calculations were based on the assumption that households headed by a single female have relatively high poverty rates, leading to higher spending on welfare, health care, criminal justice and education for those raised in the disadvantaged homes. The $112 billion estimate includes the cost of federal, state and local government programs, and lost tax revenue at all levels of government.

So it really does take a village to raise a child! (Or at least the village’s taxes.)