Six dozen educators, mental health experts, and family law professionals have condemned Fox's Bad Dads and endorsed our campaign. The endorsement statement reads:

"The undersigned believe that Fox's Bad Dads provides a distorted and counterproductive view of divorced and separated fathers. Moreover, it is harmful to children to publicly humiliate them by depicting their fathers as not loving or caring for them. We respectfully request that Fox cancel this ill-conceived show."

To view the list of endorsers, click here.

If you are an educator, mental health expert, or a family law professional who would like to endorse our campaign, click here.

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

Dartmouth Students Rebel Against Feminist Professor's Manbashing, She Reacts by....Suing Her Students! (Part I)

"[The students] staged a rebellion..."

From Joseph Rago's Dartmouth's 'Hostile' Environment (Wall Street Journal, 5/5/08):

"After a winter of discontent, the snapping point came while Priya Venkatesan was lecturing on 'ecofeminism,' which holds, in part, that scientific advancements benefit the patriarchy but leave women out. One student took issue, and reasonably so – actually, empirically so. But 'these weren't thoughtful statements,' Ms. Venkatesan protests. 'They were irrational.' The class thought otherwise. Following what she calls the student's 'diatribe,' several of his classmates applauded.

"Ms. Venkatesan informed her pupils that their behavior was 'fascist demagoguery.' Then, after consulting a physician about 'intellectual distress,' she cancelled classes for a week. Thus the pending litigation.

"Such conduct is hardly representative of the professoriate at Dartmouth, my alma mater. Faculty members tend to be professional. They also tend to be sane.

"That said, even at – or especially at – putatively superior schools, students are spoiled for choice when it comes to professors who share ideologies like Ms. Venkatesan's. The main result is to make coursework pathetically easy. Like filling in a Mad Libs, just patch something together about "interrogating heteronormativity," or whatever, and wait for the returns to start rolling in...

"Why not? It's effortless, and there are better ways to spend time than thinking deeply about ecofeminism.

"The remarkable thing about the Venkatesan affair, to me, is that her students cared enough to argue. Normally they would express their boredom with the material by answering emails on their laptops or falling asleep. But here they staged a rebellion, a French Counter-Revolution against Professor Defarge. Maybe, despite the professor's best efforts, there's life in American colleges yet."

When I was in college 25 years ago I remember my roommate telling me about a recent lecture on "ecofeminism" in his class. The feminist professor's thesis was "just as men rape women, they rape the earth."

So here the male students in the class (the small percentage who make it to college these days) had been listening to this anti-male nonsense class after class and finally did what they should do far, far more often--they challenged it. Rather than engaging in debate, the feminist professor pretended to be a victim, cancelled classes for a week, scurried off to another school to teach, and is now suing her students. It is also quite possible that some of those who rebelled against the feminist professor were female students who've not yet been poisoned with the anti-male bigotry relentlessly pushed in Women's Studies classes.

I'm sure the professor also has/will have plenty of scurrilous things to say about the despised male rebels. One advantage though--whereas in family court women often have free rein to vilify the men who they feel done them wrong, in this case most if not all of what transpired must have happened in front of witnesses. I'll be surprised if her lawsuit goes anywhere, but you never know.

Maybe Dartmouth will settle with her and give her a hefty welfare check just to go away--after all, she is an oppressed female, and an oppressed "woman of color" to boot. In the politically correct college world, that gives her a vast advantage over her male students, though I'm sure she would never acknowledge it.

Thanks to Jean Valjean, a regular poster, for sending me the story.

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

Dartmouth Students Rebel Against Feminist Professor, She Sues Her Students--Part II, Students' Evaluations of the Professor

Background: In Dartmouth Students Rebel Against Feminist Professor's Manbashing, She Reacts by....Suing Her Students! (Part I), I discussed how a group of Dartmouth students rebelled against a feminist professor and her manbashing. The professor, rather than engaging in debate, pretended to be a victim, cancelled classes for a week, scurried off to another school to teach, and said she is suing her students.

Maureen O'Connor of the IvyGate blog checked and posted some of the student evaluations of the feminist professor. One wrote:

"Professor Venkatesan refuses to answer questions, does not respond to questions, and lectures by reading off her notes in front of her. She did not make me a better writer, she did not explain the concepts well, but she did manage to make my life a living hell."

Another wrote:

"She offered no help in class or in office hours for papers. When handed a hard copy she read the paper, said it was great, but then gave terrible grades to many students. Later on she began refusing to grade papers and gave the reason that judging by our peer editing abilities we didn't need her help on papers. She missed/cancelled 5 or 6 classes and as a result the syllabus was squished into 3 weeks and she changed the final project about 4 times. A TERRIBLE CLASS."

According to O'Connor, "last we checked, Venkatesan's course had fourteen reviews on the Dartmouth Student Assembly's student evaluations website, under the following titles:

Worst teacher I have ever had - Written by a 2011

Interesting - Written by a 2011

WORST PROFESSOR EVER DO NOT TAKE THIS CLASS - Written by a 2011

save yourself now - Written by a 2011

a tad ridiculous - Written by a 2011

Interesting Material but Prof. is hard to follow - Written by a 2011

Terrible class, terrible prof - Written by a 2011

Interesting Material, Bad Prof. - Written by a 2011

If she teaches here... - Written by a 2011

WORST CLASS EVER - Written by a 2011

interesting topic, boring prof - Written by a 2011

Do NOT take this course - Written by a 2011

HORRIBLE - Written by a 2011

insecurity, ego, and more - Written by a 2011"

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

A Dairy Queen Ad that Feminists and Men's Activists Agree on...

I've never liked the ad genre of "pretty woman uses her beauty power to take advantage of  hapless guy--isn't he a fool, ha ha ha," but this Dairy Queen commercial goes even beyond that. I'd say more but it's better that you just watch it. Note that the "gentleman" is said to be "wearing a donkey shirt."

I actually first saw this commercial at www.feministing.com, where Jessica Valenti--to her credit--criticized it in her post Womanhood: Getting dudes to buy you stuff.

To watch the ad, click here.

To watch a couple other anti-male Dairy Queen commercials, see my blog posts Dairy Queen's Kit Kat Blizzard Ad and Another Anti-Male Dairy Queen Commercial. 

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

His Side with Glenn Sacks Radio Commentary: Pitfalls for Child Support Obligors Who Launch Their Own Businesses

My recent His Side with Glenn Sacks radio commentary for KLAA AM 830 in Los Angeles discusses the pitfalls faced by child support obligors who launch their own businesses.

To listen to the commentary, click here or on the audio button below.

To learn more, click here.

His Side with Glenn Sacks radio commentaries are broadcast daily on KLAA AM 830, a 50,000 watt talk station in Los Angeles and Orange County. KLAA AM 830 is owned by Arte Moreno, owner of the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim.

From 2003-2005, His Side with Glenn Sacks ran in a syndicated talk show format in Los Angeles, New York City, Boston, Seattle, and other cities. To listen to show archives, click here.

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

Parental Alienation: 'The Judge must be reminded that the relationship deteriorated when the child had little contact with the parent'

Background: J. Michael Bone (pictured) is an eminent authority on Parental Alienation, and I've often quoted his work in my newspaper columns on the issue.

Starting in late April Michael is going to be doing a four-part Teleseminar on how targeted parents can overcome Parental Alienation. The 4 week telewebcast series begins Tuesday April 29 from 8:30 - 9:30 p.m. EDT, and runs each Tuesday through 5/20. To register, click here or go to www.overcomingparentalalienation.com.

Below is Part II of my Q & A with Dr. Bone. Part I can be seen at 'Mental health professionals who don't understand Parental Alienation will find small imperfections in the targeted parent as an explanation for the child’s alienation...'

Glenn Sacks: What are the key things that a parent who is the target of Parental Alienation needs to do in order to get their judge to understand what is really happening in their case?

Dr. Bone: I believe that the most important issue to keep in mind pertains to the history of the relationship between the child and the alienated parent.  In these cases, this relationship will be dramatically different before and after the separation, or soon thereafter.  The audience (the Judge) must be repeatedly reminded that the relationship between the child and the parent deteriorated during the time when the child had little or no contact with that parent.  This exactly the opposite of what one would expect if the child had become resistant to seeing a parent who had, let's say abused them.  Therefore the historical picture, one that clearly and vividly conveys the relationship between the child and the targeted parent, and how quickly it fell apart, for reasons that do not justify the child's reaction, is the issue that the judge must be made to wrestle with.

Glenn Sacks: Dr. Bone, you warn parents who are targets of Parental Alienation not to agree to "Counter-Productive Recommendations." What are some examples of this?

Dr. Bone: Recommendations that do not work are those that do not cause the damaged and alienated relationship to be healed and returned to normal.  In many PAS cases, these recommendations are outpatient counseling.  

It is not uncommon for Family Law Judges to believe, and reasonably so, that counseling could and should be helpful.  However, when parental alienation is present in the PAS form, such outpatient counseling often turns into a format for the child to act out their alienation to the therapist.  Under these circumstances, the child’s job becomes the convincing of the therapist as to why they should not see that parent.   

If the therapist does not understand the PA dynamic, they will most likely be pulled into the alienated view of the child.  If the therapist does understand the PA phenomenon, then the child will begin to protest the therapy and will begin to say things such as it “...is not helping.”

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

Activism Opportunity in Support of Our Campaign Against Fox's Bad Dads

Syndicated columnist Kathleen Parker (pictured) of the Washington Post Writers Group recently came out with a scathing piece criticizing Fox's Bad Dads and supporting our campaign protesting the show. Her column--'Bad Dads' a Bad Idea (5/2/08)--has run in 300 newspapers over the past week.

I suggest that readers write Letters to the Editors of some of those papers to explain why you oppose the stigmatization of divorced fathers in Bad Dads.

Below we looked up the contact information for 16 of the papers. The version of Parker's article which ran in the paper is on top, followed by that paper's Letters to the Editor email address.

Also feel free to post your letters as comments on this blog post.

Beating up on fathers once again (Baltimore Sun, 5/5/08)
letters@baltsun.com

'Bad Dads' show a bad idea (Detroit News, 5/4/08)
letters@detnews.com 

Kathleen Parker: 'Bad Dads' fosters unfair stereotype (San Antonio Express, 5/4/08)
letters@express-news.net

'Bad Dads' a bad idea (Orlando Sentinel, 5/4/08)
insight@orlandosentinel.com

Parker: 'Bad Dads' TV a bad idea (Fort Worth Star-Telegram, 5/6/08)
letters@star-telegram.com 

'Bad Dads' is a bad idea (Norfolk Virginian Pilot, 5/6/08)
letters@pilotonline.com

New reality TV series bounty hunts bad dads (Denver Post, 5/2/08)
openforum@denverpost.com 

To read more and to discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

A Leading Child Support Enforcement Official's View of Fox's Bad Dads

"Child Support Intervention (CSI) was the first private agency to begin broadly publicizing the names and identifying information, including pictures, of deadbeat parents.  The practice began in February 1995 and was covered by much of the media (CNN and Time included) when the first billboard was erected in Fort Worth, Texas. 

"The first deadbeat portrayed owed over $20,000.  Of course, he threatened to sue but could not find a lawyer to handle the case.  The reason is simple: He owed the money."--Michael 'Doc' McCoy, former director, CSI 

I am introducing a new feature on my blog--"The Child Support Official's Viewpoint." The feature will be authored by Michael 'Doc' McCoy, a prominent former child support official and one of the pioneers of the private child support collection industry.

McCoy was the Founder and Managing Director of Child Support Intervention (CSI) in Fort Worth, TX from 1991 to 2002, and held a leadership position in the American Child Support Collection Association from 1993 to 1999. He retired from CSI in 2002 and currently lives in China. He has often been a commenter on www.glennsacks.com under the name "Doc."
 
McCoy has on occasion been a critic of the private child support industry and an internal reformer--to learn more, see SmartMoney magazine's Mother's Little Helpers (8/2/02).

In the selection below, McCoy defends Fox's pilot reality show Bad Dads, which has been the target of our highly-publicized protest campaign.

Why Fox Won’t Be Sued over Bad Dads
By Michael 'Doc' McCoy
 
Child Support Intervention (CSI) was the first private agency to begin broadly publicizing the names and identifying information, including pictures, of deadbeat parents.  The practice began in February 1995 and was covered by much of the media (CNN and Time included) when the first billboard was erected in Fort Worth, Texas.  The first deadbeat portrayed owed over $20,000.  Of course, he threatened to sue but could not find a lawyer to handle the case.  The reason is simple: He owed the money.  After appearing on the billboard, television cameras were allowed into family court to document him being sentenced to jail for contempt of court. 
 
What goes on in family court is a matter of public record, unless of course the records have been sealed.  As a result, if someone is delinquent in their child support obligation they can be labeled a “deadbeat” and publicly exposed without fear of liability to those who are doing the exposing.
 
CSI went on to expose deadbeats on nightly news television programs throughout the country from time to time.  Again, numerous threats of law suits.  Again, no law suits were ever filed.  The simple reason is that CSI ensured that their information was 100% correct.
 
The deadbeats that are exposed in this manner have typically been brought to court previously on contempt of court proceedings.  At the conclusion of those proceedings a judgment confirming the arrears is issued.  It is relatively easy to determine then if the judgment has been satisfied, or attempts to satisfy the judgment have been made as the obligor is instructed to send all payments through the public agency.

To read more and to discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

James Rhoades: 'Predatory Marital Gigolo' or Loving Father?

Background: According to TIME magazine, "For nearly two years, James Rhoades...has been fighting to establish in law what science and fact already have shown beyond any doubt: He is the biological father of the boy dubbed J.A.R...the boy's mother, J.N.R., whom Rhoades met while taking an online graduate course...was — and still is — married to another man, who was stationed at a Pensacola Air Force base during their affair in 2005. And that's the problem.

"[A] divided Kentucky Supreme Court told Rhoades that he could not press his paternity claim, no matter what evidence of fatherhood he might have, because J.N.R. was, and remains, a married woman...The decision has left Rhoades devastated. 'What I wanted was not just to see my son but to participate in his life. He is my son and I love him.'"

In my recent blog post If there were ever a guy in a no-win situation, it's James Rhoades, I explained that I "have mixed emotions about Rhoades and his case." Ned Holstein tackles the difficult case in his recent blog post Sanctity of Marriage, or Discrimination Against Dads? Rhoades is pictured with his son above.

In a recent post, fathers' rights activist David R. Usher called Rhoades "a predatory marital gigolo." I quoted from Usher's article and linked to it so my readers can see Usher's perpsective and judge for themselves. However, Usher took his article down and asked me to remove the quotes. My quotes were fair use but, as a favor, I have removed them.

Rhoades' reply and the readers' comments are below. As I noted earlier, I remain ambivalent about Rhoades and his case.

 James Rhoades' Rebuttal to Dave Usher
 
David R. Usher in his post "The James Rhoades Case: Mercenary Gigolo Does Not Make Three" has leveled many stinging accusations against me as a man and as a father. He has called me a mercenary gigolo, marital gigolo, disgusting individual, creep, redundant father, marital invader, mercenary gigolo du-jour, and marital offender. Of course I've never met Mr. Usher nor have I ever spoken to him, never-the-less he insists on insulting and belittling for trying to participate in my son's life.
 
Usher asserts with his diatribe that I be considered not as a father but rather as someone who should be on a "marital offenders" registry. He claims that the 2nd husband of my son's mother is the father of my son and that I should have no rights or should not be identified to my son as his father. He also says I should be held responsible for the financial expenses and mental torture I've inflicted on Mr. Ricketts. He concludes his post by saying, "...save fathers' rights for good men who did nothing wrong."
 
I believe Usher has characterized me and my intentions unfairly. I have admitted that engaging in an affair was wrong and take full responsibility, however, that should not bar me nor my son from continuing the father son relationship we had for the 1st three months of my son's life. Why should I be stripped of a re