Subject: Editorializing on poverty and parents From: msmithbe@iway1.iw.net Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 06:54:24 -0800

To: Rex Ballard 
In-Reply-To: 
X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17
Status: RO
X-Status: A

On Thu, 21 Dec 1995, Rex Ballard  
wrote:
>The welfare roles are packed with women who bought the 
"fairy tail >marriage" 

Very true.  I came from a good family--my father is a 
computer programmer.  My mother is an artist who owns a 
gallery.  My midwestern parent have been married since 1955. 
 However, I made a critical error in judgement; I see the 
same among many young women, the belief that passion + 
violence = excitement,  and stability + commitment  
=boredom.  Unfortunately, as we as a society have second and 
third generations of children who have no traditional 
nuclear family as a role model, they don't have any idea of 
what is right.  
Now, as I've said before, I don't believe the nuclear family 
is the end-all be-all of existance, but it is a model of 
what children need: They need at least one authority figure 
 that is stern and authoritative and at least one that is 
nurturing and permissive.  They need models of citizenship, 
ethics, and work.  
That's why I brought my kids here.  I am originally from 
large cities, mostly in the south although I did spend some 
time overseas.  Although in my time that meant a culturally 
diverse upbringing, today cities mean overcrowding and 
violent crimes.  So in 1990 my second husband and I packed 
what would fit in a pickup and left everything else 
behind--my good job, my friends, and my family.  I was 
living in Dallas, TX at the time--the place of my birth, and 
my youngest child was four. The marriage disintigrated 
almost immediately, and I moved into an abandoned home.  
I live in a town of 150 people.  My children are surrounded 
by people who are third generation farmers and the 
grandchildren of pioneers.  They have the same people around 
them, day after day, reminding them they an eye is kept on 
them.  They have paper routes.  I bought an old house for 
$2,500 and now it's all they can remember.  Same house, same 
babysitters, same people who make them toe the line.  That's 
what kids need.  Their babysitters are farmers, and many's 
the time they had to help out during lambing.  Last summer 
my oldest son was responsible for chasing down animals that 
escaped (pigs and sheep).

>You stated earlier, that your husband was abusive.  Suppose 
your husband >was gentle and kind, but you fell in love with 
someone else and it didn't >work out.  Would you expect the 
$300 in support?  Would you want him in 

I would want him to support his children no matter what.  I 
wouldn't ask for alimony, though; I think alimony should 
only be used for special occasions and only for a limited 
time.  Grownups don't need protecting, kids do.  I think 
$300 for two kids is reasonable; really high awards for 
child support amaze me.  Kids just don't cost that much 
money to raise.  I clothe my kids in used clothing.  I buy 
them each one good outfit for a season for special 
occasions.  They have used bicycles. 

>jail.  Remember, the key distinction between your issues 
and those raised>in the FATHERS list, is that there are no 

You have to agree that it's dangerous to punish a straying 
spouse by witholding child support. If that were the case, 
it would be simple matter to have other men testify that 
they had had her too.

>The sticky part is that when a woman goes on AFDC (in 
Colorado), she is 

I see after reading this and talking to a few people that it 
is apparent to me that AFDC laws are administered 
differently in each state.  I was not aware of this before.
South Dakota has very strict laws to protect the children.  
They are liberal about giving custody to fathers if it 
proven to be in the children's best interest.  I know three 
women close to me that are NCP.  
Even if a woman was denied AFDC, there are a host of other 
programs for children here.  Many are sponsored by local 
masonic lodges.  Many are sponsored by local churches.  Then 
there is WIC, Head Start, and other similar Federal programs 
that operate closely with charities to help in identifying 
children at risk.  We have the advantage, being a rural 
state with only about 1 million people; it's more difficult 
to administer aid and protect the rights of children in more 
populous areas.

>want to marry a man who only had 25% of his income?).  As a 

Actually, the man I married makes about $11,000 per year.  I 
have avoid romances with men who make a lot of money, and 
I'll tell you why.  I am an ambitious woman and in order to 
have some serenity in life it's necessary to not be married 
to someone who is equally ambitious.  He works hard when he 
works, and he's paying a little over half of our bills while 
I'm finishing up college, but I don't believe he'll ever 
make any more than he is now.  Plus, and this sounds a 
little greedy; I need him to be here.  I'd much rather spend 
my time off scouring thrift shops with my husband than 
sitting and waiting for him to come home from work.  It 
doesn't matter to me, because all I've ever wanted from any 
man is respect, love, and honesty.  In answer to your 
previous questions, my husband's ex she is a registered 
degreed nurse.  She works in critical care.  She joined the 
army when they had been married for about ten years, and he 
quit his job to go with her and take care of the kids.  He 
is much better a nurturer and mate than a provider, and 
that's okay because I'm a good provider and not very good at 
day-to-day household tasks.

>to make 3 times what my wife's husband makes to live in a 
room that is >smaller than her kitchen.  

Woah, you're living in the wrong place.  A half-acre lot 
just sold adjacent to my property for less than $5000.  
Remember, I'm living in a house I paid $2,500 for.  The 
house across the street from me sold for $12,000, but mine 
was in really bad shape when I bought it. Not to detract 
from your situation, you understand.  It's tragic that you 
can't make it on your salary. Out here, you could live like 
a king on less than a third of that.  Still, I feel your 
pain.  Why don't you leave the city?

>When you encourage "dead-beats" (snip)you promote the 
entire >concept of "responsibility is for suckers".  It's 
very common in the >lower economic classes, and very strong 
in the lower middle classes.
>Show me any politician who publicly advocates forcing women 
who can't >support themselves and their children to put 
their children with the (snip)
>Kids learn the message "Why should I work?

It's much more common in urban lower economic areas.  
Remember when I extolled the virtues of our rural life?  
These people are simple and they may not know pate from 
meatloaf, but they are the hardest-working, most stoic 
people I know.  Last year I paid a boy $20 to 'till my 
garden, and I wasn't satisfied with the job he did.  Within 
minute he was back, and THIS time his father was standing 
behind him, saying things like, "You got my name you better 
work hard, boy!"  The boys rarely go to college, and often 
leave school is there is an opening in the local factory 
that might not come around again.

Yet, there is a growing trend among the girls here to have 
children while in high school.  These are girls from good 
families, girls who graduate valedictorian with their 
newborns in the audience.  Last year the co-valedictorians 
were both girls, one with a child in the audience and one 
carrying twins.  Neither plans to get married, and these 
were both bright girls, obviously, because South Dakota 
schools are tough!  As a future educator, it breaks my 
heart. 

Generally speaking, the woman who can't support herself 
marries the man who won't care for the children.  After all, 
if you think about it, well-bred men are more likely to be 
attracted to a woman who is more capable, right?  I realize 
there are exceptions, but overall this is the rule.  

Poverty has its own culture.  I never realized that until I 
moved here.  (I grew up in relative afluence) People are 
fully capable of helping themselves to a better life, but 
they lack the cultural literacy, education, and belief in 
themselves to mainstream into society.  It's one thing to 
place a college education in front of a woman and help her 
fill it out.  It's another to teach her how to act, speak, 
and dress properly.  The same goes for men.  For me, it was 
easy because I had lived the life.  I came from a good 
family, and in Dallas I had a good job as a life underwriter 
assistant.  It wasn't too hard for me to apply for college, 
and scrounge all the thrift shops for the clothes that I 
knew were acceptable.  Even on AFDC I was cultivating the 
friendships of lawyers, doctors, executives and politicians, 
because I talked the talk.  
Now this country is raising a group of children who don't 
know how to behave in a sit down restaurant, how to shake 
hands, or what to wear to court.  They have a culture of 
poverty, with its beliefs and customs.  That is what you are 
speaking of.  
My kids and I do paper routes.  They have to work, sometimes 
under conditions that are uncomfortable (South Dakota 
winters are harsh) but they earn a few dollars honestly.  I 
don't pay my children for chores.  Nobody pays me for 
housework :-)

>In your situation, you have been abused by a man who should 
be prosecuted >for violent crimes, should be given a trial 
by jury, and if found guilty, 

Husband number one, the one who tried to kill me, died nine 
years ago.  Husband number two wasn't too physically 
abusive, he was just a jerk.  He refused to work, and that's 
fine, but he refused to take care of the house and kids 
while I worked.  He just wanted to have a big party.

>My wife married me under false pretenses(snip)
>Actually, I am a male feminist.  I even understand the 
motives behind these
>women's actions.  

And I have recognized that many of the men who infiltrated 
"femisa" had also been hurt by vidictive women.  But women 
have been vindictive throughout history.  It's not the fault 
of the women's movement.  Many of the men on the "Father's" 
list blame the women's movement, and feminism.  Some of the 
mail I got, if it had been in the form of a phone call, 
would have been cause to have the sherrif pay a visit to 
someone.

(snip)>week, which one should be the father?  I maintain 
that every man who >chose not to use birth control is 
equally responsible for that child.

Good point.

>It might be shocking to discover how few people could trace 
their >cultural backgrounds.

Yes.  As more children are born, it's becoming hard to keep 
track of who shouldn't be reproducing with whom, because we 
don't know who the fathers are. 

>In most cultures, the "family" is actually the extended 
family or tribe.  >But each man must feel that his sexual 
and bonding needs are met or he>will retailiate.  In many 
cultures, a woman who refuses her man can be >forced to 
leave the community.  

Do you think that a lot of what happens is also related to 
the fact that the church refused to recognize this need, and 
condemns masturbation and infidelity while at the same time 
placing contstraints on what kind of sex adults can indulge 
in?  In that way one would say that the church has hurt 
women a great deal by forcing them to have sex with a man, 
telling her its a sin to use birth control, and telling him 
he can't get his needs met elsewhere.  I think the church 
has contributed to the demise of the family.

>If you think about it, it's a miracle that we have survived 
as a species.>>In primate cultures, the woman has sex with 
as many males as possible.  >If any male feels excluded - 
especially a dominant male, he will kill the >children.  In 
areas of poverty, prostitutes and "sluts" often keep their 
>children protected in this way.

Interesting.

(snip)ong did he stay after they >were born?)

He (husband number 2) stayed until after the third one was 
born.  We planned our children.  He left because I made him 
leave.  He threatened to take the children and leave, and he 
threatened to hurt me if I tried to divorce him.  He refused 
to work, as I mentioned, or care for the house and the 
children; he was constantly in trouble with the law (bad 
checks, vandalism, and theft) and had gotten us evicted by 
his outrageous behavior (urinating off verandas, etc.)  He 
wrecked our cars.  Before throwing him out I notified his 
sister and his father, who live within blocks of me, because 
I wanted him to have a place to stay.  I encouraged him to 
go to vo-tech, which he could have done because financial 
aid for school is easy to come by here.  He refused.  My 
parents had offered to send him to lincoln technical 
institude, and he refused.  
I gave him half the household goods, and I didn't have to.  
I refused to ask for alimony, or to pay for my lawyer.  He 
put the things in a storage shed and then stopped paying the 
rent.  I've encouraged him to see his kids, and had him for 
dinner once, but after the divorce was final he said that it 
was "too painful" to see me.  I offered to have a third 
person intervene so that he could see the kids without 
seeing me.  He refused.  I've had the same number since 
before our divorce, he doesn't call.  He has made his 
choices, and now he will probably suffer the consequences.  
In April of 92 when he still had a phone, I called him and 
told him I had no heat.  (South Dakota, remember) He had not 
sent any money.  He told me that was too bad and I was on my 
own now.   He truly is at the far side of the bell curve.  
Stubborn, lazy, and ignorant.  I should have looked closely 
at his family structure before I married him.  His father 
refused to pay child support, and his father before him.

Most men take on the responsibility of children out of love 
for the>mother. 

This is a good point, one that many people miss.

>Your husband has the support of a woman who loves him.  
Your husband has >the support of your children and family.  
Your husband has an intense >commitment to make both 
marriages work.  >Again, you are the exception.  

Yes, I recognize that.  I like to mention to people as proof 
that it CAN be done, if everyne's willing to be adult, 
reasonable, and put the kids first.

The reality is that your ex's wife is being incredibly 
>generous.  Your entire relationship with her children is 
completely at >her mercy.

Yes, I know this too.  If ever she wished to she could sue 
us for child support.  So I am very, very nice to her.  When 
their daughter enrolled for college I helped her qualify for 
as much financial aid as possible.  I offered some of MY 
financial aid if she needed it.  We are also not 100% happy 
with discipline, but since we do not have custody it is 
easier not to argue.  
I think of lot of our success has to do with the fact that 
she divorced him because she was just "tired of him", not 
because she was particularly angry at him.  So she wasn't 
jealous or threatened by him when I came onto the scene.  
Thus, she's very considerate of my needs and feelings and 
doesn't feel the need to deliberately hurt us.  Also, she 
really did just want to be on her own.  She feels badly that 
he never developed his career and doesn't want him to 
suffer.  She's just glad enough to be rid of him, I suppose. 

>Therein lies the key to not just successful divorces, but 
also successful >marriages.  

You hit the nail on the head.  

When you can give up your right to be right, miracles can 
>happen.  

As long as it's in the kids best interests, yes this is 
true.

>Is he sober?

NO

>Is he with someone he loves?

Actually, I never thought about it, but since he got married 
in June I haven't gotten any of those late night calls.  
Good.  Maybe she's keeping him happy.

>Is he happy in the rest of his life?

How could he be?  He can't get a regular job, because the 
CSS people are looking for him.  Our daughter is on 
medicaid, so I have no control over that.  He's lost most of 
his driving priveledges, not only for back child support, 
but for DUI.

>Are you supportive during the call?

No, I'm usually saying something like, "Do you want to talk 
about the kids?  If you don't want to talk about the kids, 
let me get some sleep"

>To you give up your right to be right?

I stopped arguing a long time ago, and started saying things 
like, "Okay, okay, whatever you say.  I was the worst wife 
in the world.  So, now, can I go back to sleep now?"

>If he is calling after midnight.  My guess is that he is in 
one of those >moments of extreme lonliness, after working a 
long hard day,>just before pay-day, out of money.  

I don't know anymore if he's working, but his new marriage 
is supposedly not going well.  He has one of those unique 
gifts, the ability to fix things, and he refuses to develop 
it, won't work because his wages would be garnished for 
child support.  

He's had a bad round of luck with 
>women, and in fit of self-pity, possibly aided with a 
little liquid >pain-killer,

It's possible at this point that it may be in solid form as 
well.

 he calls you to remind himself of the biggest failure of 
his >life.  For him, you are proof that love is a lie, just 
like santa clause >and the tooth fairy.  

Interesting thought.  I really tried to be supportive of him 
when we divorced.  We had long calls when I told him that I 
realized I wasn't perfect and I was sorry that his childhood 
had been so horrendous and I hoped he would find happiness. 
(I am not a vidictive person) He would call me at first and 
ask my advice on women.  I'd give it.  But as time went on, 
and he refused to pay child support, the law started leaning 
on him and he bacame abusive in his calls.

>Your successful second marriage doesn't help by the way.  
It's just one >more reminder of what a failure he was.

Third.  It doesn't help that his family adores my new 
husband and I.  It doesn't help that the whole town took my 
side.  My former inlaws still refer to me as their daughter 
and act as though my husband is their son-in-law.  We come 
off looking like the "good guys," because my husband works 
hard and takes care of his step-children.  Jerry's new wife 
has tatoos, an eighth-grade education, and has been fired 
for refusing to wear "proper undergarments", and I'm a 
senior in college who once wore business suits and carried a 
briefcase to work.  
but, he did it to himself.  He was living that way when I 
met him.  I encouraged him to make the most of his assets, 
but he was stuck in that "culture of poverty" I mentioned 
before.  When we moved to South Dakota, he fell into old 
habits of cheating people out of money and not working.  I 
asked to go to counseling, I told him I couldn't live this 
way, etc.  He controlled what little money we did have, and 
the straw that broke the camel's back was when I became very 
ill and he wouldn't give me $25 for medicine I desperately 
needed, to teach me a lesson. He would lose his wallet out 
on a drunk, and come home and kick me out of bed because it 
was "all my fault".  I really did want this marriage to 
work.  But it takes two.


>He can barely tolerate the pain of talking to you for an 
hour on the >telephone.  Spending several hours with your 
daughter would be an endless >reminder of his failure.  The 
girl won't have his values, his hopes, his >dreams for her. 
 He can't buy the dress he wants to give her, because he 
>can't afford it.
>
>> He says that since I divorced him I am ON MY OWN.
>
>But you're not on your own, are you.  You have a loving 
husband who cares >for you, loves your daughter, and wants 
to share his life with you.  

But when he said this, I had nobody.  I was on welfare and 
having to live on $450 per month

I >would reccomend that your husband adopt your daughter.  

Yes, we are considering this.  It's my understanding that 
both the children, my daughter and a son, six months old 
when we divorced, would benefit.  I have been reluctant to 
sever this last tie, because I was afraid that he would do 
something drastic, either to us or to himself.  I often feel 
very sorry for him.  He doesn't know what he's missing.  His 
son, now four, looks exactly like him.

If something 
>happened to you, your ex would take custody - to get 
revenge at your >daughter.  

Not according to South Dakota law.  According to state 
family law, the custodial parent can assign custody in a 
will.  It is the burden of the NCP to prove that the new 
arrangement is unfit.  I have willed my children to my 
sister and her husband in the case that my husband doesn't 
survive me.

He probably spends the money he should be sending you 
>on self-destructive behaviors (drugs, prostitution, 
booze...) as a way of >getting even with you.  Like cutting 
his own throat to hurt you.

Probably.  I don't think he works much, though.  I never 
wanted him to get this way, but how was I to prevent it?  I 
couldn't stay married to him.

>I don't know your husband.  I know the feelings I have as a 
non-custodial >parent.  I was so determinined never 
>to let myself be hurt like that again that I had a 
vasectomy.  

I know the feeling.  When I realized that I was probably 
going to care for my children alone I had a tubal ligation. 
 I had mine cauterized shut.


>Whose children?  

Well, to be universal I'd have to say all, but of course 
being human I have to say I protect mine first.  I'm very 
good at it, too.
I've devoted the last five years of my life to a double 
major in Geology and Secondary Education.  I've spent a lot 
of time training myself to care about other people's 
children.  So I've reached a point where my main concern is 
the children.  There is too much focus on parent's rights.  
The issue should be the children.  Even if it means making 
some adults uncomfortable.  You mention your son is a 
skinhead.  That's unfortunate.  I'm sorry for you in this 
situation.  I hope he learns that the road he is on is the 
wrong one, and I'm sorry for your loss.  I do have a child 
with some behavioral problems, problems that we believe stem 
from her fathers alcohol abuse.  I know it can be almost 
like losing a child to death when they turn off the right 
path.


Regards,

Misty Smith-Beringer 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= 
Taboos are political.  They exist to keep people from 
thinking independently, which might make them aware 
that they are oppressed.  --M. French

From msmithbe@iway1.iw.net Mon Dec 25 21:47:57 1995
Received: from iway1.iw.net (iway1.iw.net [204.157.148.2]) by cnj.digex.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA01542 ; for ; Mon, 25 Dec 1995 21:47:55 -0500