Among those who celebrate Christmas, the holiday is often (for better or worse) a time to celebrate family, and to bring usually distant family members together – parents and their adult children, grandparents and their grandchildren, and so on.
A proposal from the guy behind the Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Technology blog would mean a bit of a change in this tradition: it would eliminate grandchildren from the equation utterly. Not just by excluding them from the holiday celebrations, but by eliminating them altogether – at least until his demands are met.
Upset that paternal grandmothers aren’t rising up en masse and joining the father’s rights movement to support their sons in custody disputes, Mr. PMAFT has proposed a Grandchildren Strike.
Here’s part of his stirring manifesto:
It’s one thing to not realize that divorce means that you can’t see your grandchildren before a divorce happens. It’s another to be fine with it afterwards as paternal grandmothers appear to be. This is an example of team woman in action. It’s a particularly extreme example in that grandmothers are willing to never see their grandchildren again just to support daughters in law they will no longer have a connection with.
The only way to deal with this is a true grandchildren strike, denying grandchildren from potential grandmothers. A grandchildren strike should not be necessary, but as we can see, paternal grandmothers don’t care when they can no longer see their grandchildren. The only way to deal with this is to not have children in the first place.
In your face, hypothetical future grandmothers!
Usually, I advocate surrogate mothers in India for men who really want children in the current feminist climate, but doing so protects our mothers from the consequences of their actions. That is unconscionable so perhaps we should all be on a grandchildren strike.
A brilliant plan, clearly. This “strike” is designed in such a way that it will have zero effect on the women Mr. PMAFT is angry with – paternal grandmothers. Instead, it’s aimed at mothers who aren’t grandmothers, whom I guess Mr. PMAFT assumes will sign up with the father’s rights movement en masse in order to support their sons in hypothetical custody battles over grandchildren that don’t exist.
It’s as if workers angry at their boss were to go on strike not against the company at which they work, but against a rival company on the grounds that some day they might conceivably work there.
Meanwhile, the plan neatly eliminates the problem at the root of Mr. PMAFT’s anger. Men can’t lose custody battles if they don’t have any children to have custody of in the first place.