Yesterday I had the privilege of speaking with Hanne Weedon from a Philly-operated organization called Third Path. What she and Third Path stand for is directly aligned with one of the main issues I'm covering in the film: how to get dads more involved with their families by finding creative solutions to the balance of work and family.
Third Path's grassroots approach is to create a support network for families that are seeking to balance work and family. One of their methods is to collect stories of creative approaches different families have taken. They are also putting together a dad seminar, which will happen next fall.
Talking with Hanne, it's so abundantly clear how removed our free market consumer culture is from the values of really emphasizing the family. By demonstrating positive examples of how some people are able to navigate work/family is extremely inspiring and certainly what I intend to include in our film.
It was such a pleasure speaking with Hanne and I'm so excited to hopefully include them and some of the families they represent in the film. For more about third path, visit thirdpath.org.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Playing Catch - By Director Dana Glazer
Today our 10 month-old-son did something rather extraordinary. I plopped a tennis ball in his lap and he grabbed it and flung it back at me. It was one of those dad-son moments that one hears about and I can't tell you how excited I was. Images of years to come - playing catch with this boy floated through my mind. I thought back on my own dad and I in our backyard, tossing a ball back and forth.
There is truly something iconic about playing catch with one's father and then one's kid(s). It's somehow ingrained in us. Ralph LaRossa does a good job at dissecting why this game of catch is so important to us. He speculates it is a result of the glorification of baseball and suburbanization - both taking place in the Mid-Twentieth Century. I think the game of catch is a symbolic form of communication between fathers and kids. There's a rhythm to the gesture. It's a connective action. A tangible link between generations.
Whatever it is, it feels good to have Jamie joining in on this long, iconic tradition and I certainly plan to include footage of fathers and their kids tossing together in the film.
There is truly something iconic about playing catch with one's father and then one's kid(s). It's somehow ingrained in us. Ralph LaRossa does a good job at dissecting why this game of catch is so important to us. He speculates it is a result of the glorification of baseball and suburbanization - both taking place in the Mid-Twentieth Century. I think the game of catch is a symbolic form of communication between fathers and kids. There's a rhythm to the gesture. It's a connective action. A tangible link between generations.
Whatever it is, it feels good to have Jamie joining in on this long, iconic tradition and I certainly plan to include footage of fathers and their kids tossing together in the film.
More Housework For Guys = More Sex?? - By Director Dana Glazer
There's been a lot in the news recently about how there's a correlation about how when men do more of the housework it puts their wives more in the mood. A recent conversation with Sociologist Dr. Michael Kimmel further echoed this. It's certainly a great headline - at least from a guy's perspective (you know what's mostly on our brains:)
However, I felt that a little more research was needed, so I did a little recon at a mommy community know as Kaboose. You can read the whole thread here
The results were consistent with what I've been hearing - that YES! there is a correlation. It seems quite obvious, if one really thinks about it. More housework on the man's part makes for a more cooperative family situation. And yet, statistically speaking, men are still lagging way behind in the house care dept. It goes back to male identity issues, I suppose, something I hope Dr. Kimmel will elucidate further in the film. Hopefully, the message will ring loud enough to make a difference in terms of helping create a more balanced family situation. And if you're reading this and you are interested in sharing your experience on film in this regard, please reach out to me at dana@evolutionofdad.com.
One of the challenges I face as a filmmaker is to make a film about dads that plays to dads and men (although certainly not to the exclusion of women - don't get the wrong idea.) Using sex as an impetus to promoting dads being further involved with the family isn't the big picture but it's definitely a useful catalyst.
However, I felt that a little more research was needed, so I did a little recon at a mommy community know as Kaboose. You can read the whole thread here
The results were consistent with what I've been hearing - that YES! there is a correlation. It seems quite obvious, if one really thinks about it. More housework on the man's part makes for a more cooperative family situation. And yet, statistically speaking, men are still lagging way behind in the house care dept. It goes back to male identity issues, I suppose, something I hope Dr. Kimmel will elucidate further in the film. Hopefully, the message will ring loud enough to make a difference in terms of helping create a more balanced family situation. And if you're reading this and you are interested in sharing your experience on film in this regard, please reach out to me at dana@evolutionofdad.com.
One of the challenges I face as a filmmaker is to make a film about dads that plays to dads and men (although certainly not to the exclusion of women - don't get the wrong idea.) Using sex as an impetus to promoting dads being further involved with the family isn't the big picture but it's definitely a useful catalyst.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Evolution of Dad Production Vehicle - From Director Dana Glazer
Only with a film like this can one get away with a stroller-turned-equipment-truck. That's Jamie, my 10 month old, at the wheel. Lucky for us he hasn't joined the teamsters yet:)
Sunday, September 9, 2007
The SAHD Myth?? - By Director Dana Glazer
Recently I happened across a blog entry by Penelope Trunk aka "The Brazen Careerist", titled "My Own Marriage and the Stay-At-Home Dad Myth." It was definitely thought provoking and anything that stops to make one think, in my mind is a good thing.
Is the concept of the happy Stay-At-Home Dad doing the laundry, shopping, schlepping the kids, etc, a true and accurate generalization or is it, as Ms. Trunk would say, a "myth"? Obviously, the discussion bares a lot of significance, given the topic of our film and the emphasis on the extreme version of involved fathering: SAHD's.
I can honestly report that the majority of Stay-At-Home Dads I have met and spoken with are satisfied with their work. Is it possible that only the happy, contented ones are open to talking about it? Possibly, although I certainly have talked to some that are unhappy with the arrangement. Being an at-home-dad, just like an at-home-mom, is something that some people shine to while others don't. It really has to do with one's personality, what one values as fulfilling and one's outlook on the world.
For many men or women, the idea of tossing out one's career dreams and ambitions to the wind, because one's partner is making more money, can be quite upsetting. The cultural messages to excel in the marketplace can exacerbate this. So, for dads and moms at home to be working on a side project, is a way of maintaining one's identity outside of being a parent - something, personally speaking, that can be essential to making the situation work. I think this holds for many moms and dads alike.
The only difference is that being an SAHM is more culturally accepted (albeit with its own degree of negative perceptions) than the SAHD. At-Home Dads are also more isolated because there are fewer of them, they feel shunned by society as a whole, they often feel apart from other moms - and if there are other home-making dads around, the mutual commonality of being at home with kids that works so well between women, doesn't translate quite as well for men.
The bottom line is that our culture does not make it easy for families to cope, given all the conflicting messages we've been told. We're all still so caught up with antiquated gender roles that don't necessarily have a place in our own personal lives.
The other part of the equation is: what is best for kids? The way I see it, the more involved both parents can be their children's lives, the better. What dads and moms each bring to the table are unique and mutually enriching for the kids (and themselves in the process.) And from everything I've read and the experts I've spoken to, it's fairly clear that both parents are equally able to care for their kids - although they may do so very differently.
Going back to Trunk's assertion that the happy SAHD is a myth - let me say this: It may very well be for some people, but for others this role could be a very meaningful, fulfilling experience - something they'd never considered in their lives before children. Better that we promote this new design of dad and pave the way for others considering becoming SAHDs than to get stuck on outmoded, limiting cultural models of what dads can and can't be - something Trunk's "myth" back-handedly supports.
Is the concept of the happy Stay-At-Home Dad doing the laundry, shopping, schlepping the kids, etc, a true and accurate generalization or is it, as Ms. Trunk would say, a "myth"? Obviously, the discussion bares a lot of significance, given the topic of our film and the emphasis on the extreme version of involved fathering: SAHD's.
I can honestly report that the majority of Stay-At-Home Dads I have met and spoken with are satisfied with their work. Is it possible that only the happy, contented ones are open to talking about it? Possibly, although I certainly have talked to some that are unhappy with the arrangement. Being an at-home-dad, just like an at-home-mom, is something that some people shine to while others don't. It really has to do with one's personality, what one values as fulfilling and one's outlook on the world.
For many men or women, the idea of tossing out one's career dreams and ambitions to the wind, because one's partner is making more money, can be quite upsetting. The cultural messages to excel in the marketplace can exacerbate this. So, for dads and moms at home to be working on a side project, is a way of maintaining one's identity outside of being a parent - something, personally speaking, that can be essential to making the situation work. I think this holds for many moms and dads alike.
The only difference is that being an SAHM is more culturally accepted (albeit with its own degree of negative perceptions) than the SAHD. At-Home Dads are also more isolated because there are fewer of them, they feel shunned by society as a whole, they often feel apart from other moms - and if there are other home-making dads around, the mutual commonality of being at home with kids that works so well between women, doesn't translate quite as well for men.
The bottom line is that our culture does not make it easy for families to cope, given all the conflicting messages we've been told. We're all still so caught up with antiquated gender roles that don't necessarily have a place in our own personal lives.
The other part of the equation is: what is best for kids? The way I see it, the more involved both parents can be their children's lives, the better. What dads and moms each bring to the table are unique and mutually enriching for the kids (and themselves in the process.) And from everything I've read and the experts I've spoken to, it's fairly clear that both parents are equally able to care for their kids - although they may do so very differently.
Going back to Trunk's assertion that the happy SAHD is a myth - let me say this: It may very well be for some people, but for others this role could be a very meaningful, fulfilling experience - something they'd never considered in their lives before children. Better that we promote this new design of dad and pave the way for others considering becoming SAHDs than to get stuck on outmoded, limiting cultural models of what dads can and can't be - something Trunk's "myth" back-handedly supports.
Saturday, September 1, 2007
THE TROOPER AND THE HARE - by Tracy Russell, Associate Producer
Two Saturdays ago, Dana and I had the good fortune to meet dad Kevin Knussman and his family in Easton, Maryland. Kevin, a retired State trooper, sued the state of Maryland in the early 1990's, upon their refusal to grant him leave to provide care for his ailing, pregnant wife Kim and, later for their newborn daughter, as Kim recovered. Kevin and his family slowly and steadily persevered through a ten year legal battle that ultimately awarded them minimal financial gain but became the landmark case for fathers in the US seeking leave under the FMLA and being met with employer opposition.
Kevin Knussman says that he just had to take a stand for what was right and what was right for him was and is, that, family needs come first. You may think what I was thinking- that ten years is an incredibly long time to maintain focus on any goal, particularly one that carries with it an element of discomfort. It takes a person of incredible resolve to continue employment with an organization that he or she is in conflict with and that is exactly what Kevin Knussman did. Not to mention the razing by his fellow troopers to be endured, as you can imagine.
He remained employed by the State, as the court battle progressed, until he had accrued 23 years of service and was able to retire. He now works part time as a volunteer firefighter and is the primary caregiver for his two daughters, while his wife Kim works full time outside of their home. The societal consensus seems to be that, if a man prioritizes family over work, then he is somehow less of a man. Kevin's wife Kim; however, contends that her husband is the "manliest of men," for putting his family first, for stepping, with open arms, into an opportunity to be an involved, engaged father and for creating and maintaining a true partnership with her, in not only the raising of their children but; also, in the maintenance of their home.
As I sat there listening to Kevin and Kim speak about their life together, something became as gorgeously clear to me as the weather that day in Maryland- something having to do with commitment, something about how truly and fully committing yourself to- a cause, a partner, your children, or any goal really; insures, that no matter how tough the fight, no matter how gargantuan the demons, no matter how many hurdles or how long it takes, you can do it.
Kevin Knussman says that he just had to take a stand for what was right and what was right for him was and is, that, family needs come first. You may think what I was thinking- that ten years is an incredibly long time to maintain focus on any goal, particularly one that carries with it an element of discomfort. It takes a person of incredible resolve to continue employment with an organization that he or she is in conflict with and that is exactly what Kevin Knussman did. Not to mention the razing by his fellow troopers to be endured, as you can imagine.
He remained employed by the State, as the court battle progressed, until he had accrued 23 years of service and was able to retire. He now works part time as a volunteer firefighter and is the primary caregiver for his two daughters, while his wife Kim works full time outside of their home. The societal consensus seems to be that, if a man prioritizes family over work, then he is somehow less of a man. Kevin's wife Kim; however, contends that her husband is the "manliest of men," for putting his family first, for stepping, with open arms, into an opportunity to be an involved, engaged father and for creating and maintaining a true partnership with her, in not only the raising of their children but; also, in the maintenance of their home.
As I sat there listening to Kevin and Kim speak about their life together, something became as gorgeously clear to me as the weather that day in Maryland- something having to do with commitment, something about how truly and fully committing yourself to- a cause, a partner, your children, or any goal really; insures, that no matter how tough the fight, no matter how gargantuan the demons, no matter how many hurdles or how long it takes, you can do it.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
The Recurring Narrative of Dad? - From Director Dana Glazer
Last week, as I was sitting in my local hair salon awaiting a trim, I noticed an US magazine on the table next to me. It's cover story was about celebrity dads with an emphasis on how cool these daddy's are. I perused the pages and there were a bunch of pics of different movie stars on parade with their kids. Brad Pitt. Heath Ledger. You get the idea. It was hard to tell who was really involved with their kids and who was opting for a little friendly PR. There was an image specialist who was quoted as saying that things have changed in Hollywood with dads no longer shy about showing off being involved dads for the camera compared to prior generations of celebrity men.
I asked the salon owner if I could have the magazine copy, thinking that while of course this isn't a film about celebrity dads, the face they had been emphasized as cool dads reflects upon the acceptance of our culture regarding the image of involved dads in general.
Cut to a week later and my phone conversation with Dr. Ralph LaRossa, who has been studying fatherhood for the past twenty-five years. I mentioned this article to him and his reaction was quite intriguing. In sum, his perspective is that while we'd like to think that dads of today are more involved than ever before (and there is some evidence to support this - witness the larger number of SAHD's than ever before) the idea that we think one's generation of dads is so much more involved than previous ones is a recurring cultural narrative that occurs with nearly every new generation. In other words, every generation likes to separate themselves as being special and more improved than the previous one. (Pepsi's "The Choice of a New Generation" slogan keeps reverberating in my ears.) Dr. LaRossa shared how he can find a 1950's article that promotes the same kind of celebrity dad as the one I read in US magazine. He also said there were similar findings about the cultural view of dads in general in the 1920's and even as far back as 1900!
So, going back to the US magazine article, from this line of thinking, the celebrity dads story is just another recurring cultural narrative designed to make us feel better about ourselves and, frankly, to sell magazines.
Unlike US Magazine, I have every intention of digging deep into the real issues and narrative thread of the American Dad, and yet, to emphasize LaRossa's findings too much - that we are overplaying our specialness, our generational identity, in all of this...I'm not sure how many people would want to watch that version of this movie. It's not fun being told one isn't so special or unique.
My mind keeps jumping to Howard Beal in "Network" and how, after becoming a populist hero by expressing his "Mad as hell!" anthem, then succumbed to the influence of the corporate philosophy and told his audience that they were all just a bunch of "transistors."
Nobody wants to hear they aren't special.
There's a balance between sharing the complexity of the truth and trying to paint a picture that is inspiring, entertaining and thought provoking. Ultimately, a little pepper in the stew is a good thing.
More food for thought...
I've certainly read about how there was a movement for dads to be more involved in the 30's, but Dr. LaRossa gave an intriguing perspective on why it occurred then: he cited how the primary defining identity of fathers is completely connected to the socio/economic factors of the time; and so in the 1930's, when so many people were financially not faring so well, the primary dad characteristic was more about 'being a buddy' to one's kids, whereas in the '50's, the cultural emphasis was mainly on being the breadwinner - partly due to a period of economic growth, where more men were able to bring home a better paycheck. Interesting!
I asked the salon owner if I could have the magazine copy, thinking that while of course this isn't a film about celebrity dads, the face they had been emphasized as cool dads reflects upon the acceptance of our culture regarding the image of involved dads in general.
Cut to a week later and my phone conversation with Dr. Ralph LaRossa, who has been studying fatherhood for the past twenty-five years. I mentioned this article to him and his reaction was quite intriguing. In sum, his perspective is that while we'd like to think that dads of today are more involved than ever before (and there is some evidence to support this - witness the larger number of SAHD's than ever before) the idea that we think one's generation of dads is so much more involved than previous ones is a recurring cultural narrative that occurs with nearly every new generation. In other words, every generation likes to separate themselves as being special and more improved than the previous one. (Pepsi's "The Choice of a New Generation" slogan keeps reverberating in my ears.) Dr. LaRossa shared how he can find a 1950's article that promotes the same kind of celebrity dad as the one I read in US magazine. He also said there were similar findings about the cultural view of dads in general in the 1920's and even as far back as 1900!
So, going back to the US magazine article, from this line of thinking, the celebrity dads story is just another recurring cultural narrative designed to make us feel better about ourselves and, frankly, to sell magazines.
Unlike US Magazine, I have every intention of digging deep into the real issues and narrative thread of the American Dad, and yet, to emphasize LaRossa's findings too much - that we are overplaying our specialness, our generational identity, in all of this...I'm not sure how many people would want to watch that version of this movie. It's not fun being told one isn't so special or unique.
My mind keeps jumping to Howard Beal in "Network" and how, after becoming a populist hero by expressing his "Mad as hell!" anthem, then succumbed to the influence of the corporate philosophy and told his audience that they were all just a bunch of "transistors."
Nobody wants to hear they aren't special.
There's a balance between sharing the complexity of the truth and trying to paint a picture that is inspiring, entertaining and thought provoking. Ultimately, a little pepper in the stew is a good thing.
More food for thought...
I've certainly read about how there was a movement for dads to be more involved in the 30's, but Dr. LaRossa gave an intriguing perspective on why it occurred then: he cited how the primary defining identity of fathers is completely connected to the socio/economic factors of the time; and so in the 1930's, when so many people were financially not faring so well, the primary dad characteristic was more about 'being a buddy' to one's kids, whereas in the '50's, the cultural emphasis was mainly on being the breadwinner - partly due to a period of economic growth, where more men were able to bring home a better paycheck. Interesting!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
