From: Don Beaver <beaver@cs.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: excerpts from a new  (1)
Date: 28 Aug 1992 21:31:15 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <17j704INNnps@agate.berkeley.edu> Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>MCCLOSKEY@FALCON.AAMRL.WPAFB.AF.MIL (KATHY MCCLOSKEY) writes...
>KM> There's a book out this year entitled _Women Respond to the Men's
>KM> Movement_ edited by Kay Leigh Hagan, and published by Pandora's Books:
>KM> HarperCollins (HarperSanFrancisco), New York, NY.

[commentary on gender roles in custody deleted]

>And as for Ms. Chesler's (ie., author of the second quote) allegation of
>"70% of men who fight for custody, get it" (paraphrased), I *still* have not
>seen any *tangible PROOF* provided from *any* court circuit in the United
>States, Canada, or any other country.  Besides which, if it is true, then
>where are all the legions of single fathers?  

...

>[Moderator's note: a reference about disputed custody cases was sent to
>Mr. Steeves.  There are few single fathers because few custody cases
>*are* disputed.  We will not post further discussion on this subject
>unless someone comes up with new references/information. - MB]

I don't know what MB's reference was, but my "new" information is:

Phyllis Chesler's "Mothers on Trial," page 63:
  "I decided to study sixty custodially challenged, predominantly
  white mothers..."

Page 63:
  "I interviewed fifty mothers who were black, brown, yellow, and red."
Page 64:
  "I also interviewed fifty-five fathers..."  

Page 66:
  "In my study, 70 percent of these custodially challenged and
  ''good enough'' mothers lost custody..."  [in the 60-mother sample]


Four remarks on the accuracy of this "sample" study:

1. Chesler herself writes, p. 64:
  "Unbidden, silent, the mother Medea accompanied me to each interview."

2. Chesler classifies fathers as (pp. 76-77):
  "absent and authoritarian Patriarch (60 percent);
   the Peer-Buddy                     (17 percent);
   and the Smother-Father             (23 percent)."

  For her, there are no other types of fathers.

3. Chesler apparently never says whether the 55 fathers have 
   any relation to her 60 studied cases or her 50 non-white mothers.

4. Chesler's table (p. 79) about the "Eight Major Reasons ... 
Fathers Battled for Child Custody"  lists eight negative reasons
(including control, punishment, patriarchy, property, superiority, 
infertility), but not one single positive reason, such as love
of the children.  Is this unbiased?  Is this selective?  What does
the mother Medea say?


Sorry for the very last line, but I can confidently invite any
free-thinking person to peruse this book with an open mind, 
consider the nature of the "information-gathering"
and the "objectivity" of its selection and presentation, 
and then decide whether, as a feminist or not, this sort
of study is a valid "reference" on which to base conclusions.


One additional point: even if one stipulates the 70% claim,
it does not take into account the pervasive discouragement
of fathers from even attempting to fight custody.  Thus,
such a statistic would already be misleading, since it considers
only those cases where the father already has an overwhelming
reason to suspect he might have success.  Unfortunately,
I know of no study concerning such "discouragement," and
I do want to avoid Chesler-ish conjectures, but I hope 
my point is clear.

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged



-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.