OK, I couldn’t resist. Going back to Dalrock’s piece on the mom who thinks that her boys are unsafe. Let’s talk about men who are actually unsafe. First, we need to define terms.
By “unsafe men” I mean actual “perpetrators of violent crimes.” I don’t mean “feel unsafe” which feminism and other liberal policies suggest perpetration by “men” and/or “the patriarchy” as microaggressions, making someone feel bad, and supposed but false systemic bias against women in society.
A review of the empirical evidence in the professional literature of the social sciences gives policymakers an insight into the root causes of crime. Consider, for instance:
- Over the past thirty years, the rise in violent crime parallels the rise in families abandoned by fathers.
- High-crime neighborhoods are characterized by high concentrations of families abandoned by fathers.
- State-by-state analysis by Heritage scholars indicates that a 10 percent increase in the percentage of children living in single-parent homes leads typically to a 17 percent increase in juvenile crime.
- The rate of violent teenage crime corresponds with the number of families abandoned by fathers.
- The type of aggression and hostility demonstrated by a future criminal often is foreshadowed in unusual aggressiveness as early as age five or six.
- The future criminal tends to be an individual rejected by other children as early as the first grade who goes on to form his own group of friends, often the future delinquent gang.
On the other hand:
- Neighborhoods with a high degree of religious practice are not high-crime neighborhoods.
- Even in high-crime inner-city neighborhoods, well over 90 percent of children from safe, stable homes do not become delinquents. By contrast only 10 percent of children from unsafe, unstable homes in these neighborhoods avoid crime.
- Criminals capable of sustaining marriage gradually move away from a life of crime after they get married.
- The mother’s strong affectionate attachment to her child is the child’s best buffer against a life of crime.
- The father’s authority and involvement in raising his children are also a great buffer against a life of crime.
The scholarly evidence, in short, suggests that at the heart of the explosion of crime in America is the loss of the capacity of fathers and mothers to be responsible in caring for the children they bring into the world. This loss of love and guidance at the intimate levels of marriage and family has broad social consequences for children and for the wider community. The empirical evidence shows that too many young men and women from broken families tend to have a much weaker sense of connection with their neighborhood and are prone to exploit its members to satisfy their unmet needs or desires. This contributes to a loss of a sense of community and to the disintegration of neighborhoods into social chaos and violent crime. If policymakers are to deal with the root causes of crime, therefore, they must deal with the rapid rise of illegitimacy.
Even Heritage has some bias in their wording. Homes “abandoned” by fathers is a misnomer.
- Wives initiate the majority of divorces (65-70%).
- The out of wedlock birth rate has soared to as much as 70% for black women, 65% Native American, 55% Latino, 30% White, and close to 20% Asian for a national average of around 40%.
Image from wikipedia.
The total amount of fatherless homes caused by the policies of feminism aiming to destroy marriage by increasing out of wedlock birth rates and no fault divorce is high. How high?
Accounting for the national average of 40% out of wedlock births plus 50% of marriages ending in divorce which are 70% initiated by women we get:
40% out of wedlock + (60% wedlock * 50% divorce rate * 70% initiated divorces) = .4 + (.6 * .5 * .7) = .4 + .21 = .61 fatherlessness.
Thus, approximately (since not every divorced home has kids but out of wedlock births all count as fatherlessness):
- 30% of marriages have husbands and fathers
- 61% of marriages end in divorce and/or fatherlessness, which is caused by feminists and feminism policies
- 9% of homes the divorced and/or fatherlessness is caused by the dad (e.g. so-called deadbeat husbands/dads)
Let’s re-quote one of the most important statistics from the Heritage statement to re-emphasize the importance of fathers:
Even in high-crime inner-city neighborhoods, well over 90 percent of children from safe, stable homes do not become delinquents. By contrast only 10 percent of children from unsafe, unstable homes in these neighborhoods avoid crime.
We also know that homes with children from a previous relationship because of a “mother’s boyfriend” or mother’s new husband” are prone to be some of the most violent including domestic and child abuse.
Basically, the stability of the biological father in a marriage almost literally prevents crime and delinquency of the children in that home.
This is the legacy of feminism — the “freedom” of women. Creating the problem it complains about.
Feminism creates “unsafe men,” then complains about it.