[Indexed as: Cooper-Evans, Gail, “Men’s Lib Comes to Iowa,” Cedar Rapids Gazette (Io.), Aug. 1, 1976]

Men just may be ready for it. At any rate, an organized effort has been initiated in Iowa.

The Men’s Rights Assn. (MRA), based in St. Paul, Minjcu, a nationwide effort some 3,000 members strong, has selected Don Lamb of Gladbrook to head its Iowa campaign.

Lamb has only been at his post three weeks and doesn’t have any members yet. But an ad placed in a local newspaper is getting results, he said.

Women have been working for liberation for several years cow and it’s time, some men feel, to try to “equalize” some of the “equality” that feminists have been lobbying for and getting.

MRA was organized in 1967. According to its national president, Richard Doyle of St. Paul, the purposes of MRA are:

•To obtain equal rights under the law for all male persons.
•To promote and foster the just and competent administration of government, especially of the judicial branch,
•To study, promote and engage in activities which will strengthen the marriage relationship and family life.
•To foster, promote and undertake activities which will restore and maintain the dignity of male persons.
•To engage in, foster and promote continuing public education in the aforesaid areas.
•To aid and assist individual persons consistent with, the purposes of the organization.

Preserve Marriages

In a press release distributed by the MRA it is further stated, “Not only men, but all fair-minded, family-oriented people should support most of the above purposes. The family unit is the root of our democratic society and good marriages should be preserved.

“The privileged position of the wife in our divorce courts is a major cause for increased divorce.”

It is the last paragraph of the statement that causes men like Doyle and Lamb to band together and assert their “rights.” Both are “victims,” as they say, of “divorce court injustice.” Doyle’s divorce occurred in 1958; Lamb’s just last Tuesday. Both men are bitter about the settlements. As Lamb said. “I lost my (four) children and most of our assets, “However, I was allowed to keep our bills, pay child support and all the attorney’s fees.”

If Lamb pays what the court has decreed, he claims he will be $75 in the hole every month. This is in spite of the fact that his salary as a school teacher is supplemented with income from a second job.

Lamb sees the court decree was unfair. “It was my wife who wanted the divorce in the first place. After 16 years she just didn’t want to be married anymore.” I am the one who is paying for it. I am the loser. The lawyers (his wife’s, his and the court-appointed attorney for the children) all got together and came up with an agreement. I felt like everything was out of my hands.”

Losing money isn’t pleasant, Lamb said, but it’s “nothing compared to losing my own children.” Both Lamb and Doyle contend that such divorce settlements are not unusual. “It’s time to get divorce courts out of the Dark Ages,” Doyle said. “Giving mothers automatic custody of the children is not always the best way.”

Doyle maintains that the judiciary, rather than the legislative bodies, is responsible for perpetuating the inequality of divorce settlements, “Legislative bodies have very little to do with it. Reform has to be directed to the courts.”

“New laws don’t change a bloody thing.” As a result, Doyle’s organization “embarrasses” the judiciary by picketing judges who give custody to what he calls “bad” mothers.

“Bad mothers are a bad influence on children morally; they neglect them. I’ve seen statistics that show that children of divorce, those that live with their mothers, are delinquent in a ratio of 15 to 1 over those children from unbroken homes. These are national figures. Whereas those children living with fathers turn out better.”

He admits those are generalities but says he feels fathers should be awarded custody in a clearcut 50 percent of all divorce settlements, regardless of ability of either parent to rear the children.

Doyle said that “women’s lib was fine when we thought it was a philosophy we could live with. But men are actually discriminated against in certain areas.” He said visible results of the Equal Rights amendment are not to improve the status of the male but “to obliterate the differences between the sexes… a ‘have your cake and eat it too’ philosophy.” “While he agrees with the idea of “equal pay for equal work,” he says, “We are opposed to women emulating men without the natural abilities to do so,” as in the carpentry field or other areas traditionally occupied by men.

Disapproval

“I might add that I also don’t approve of pansy men who want to act like women.” Doyle notes that there may be exceptions – such as some men who are capable of taking care of babies better than the mothers, but “those are exceptions.”

To “bring up the consciousness of the judiciary,” Doyle said, the MRA would file lawsuits against local governments for acts of discrimination against men, such as in domestic relations court (child custody) cases.

“We wouldn’t file foolish lawsuits like women’s libbers do,” he said. An example of a “foolish” lawsuit, he said, is one currently before the Minnesota courts that would cut off athletic funds to the University of Minnesota for inequality in funding men’s and women’s athletic programs.

“Women aren’t as athletically inclined as men so I don’t think they need the same funding as men. They don’t want to play football and wrestle; they don’t need the money for such programs.”

Doyle also said the MRA will direct its efforts to equalizing the treatment of men prisoners. “We want to organize all men into a movement so we will have a voice that will be heard around the country.”