film by Douglas Wolfsperger; interview with the SWR1-Radio 10/06/2009
Since this film in advance is quite controversial, I was also invited to an interview with the SWR1, to my view as there is now the adult child of divorce growing up fatherless, to describe, I have decided to summarily to report on my website about it. In addition to a film criticism, there is still my personal opinion about the film and (listen to mp3 file) down to a podcast of the SWR1 interviews on "fathers after separation."
"The disenfranchised father
film criticism of the Berliner Morgenpost 10:06:09:
"DISPOSED OF FATHER
Männerlarmoyanz that hard to bear is
Thursday 11 June 2009 04:00 - By B. Schweizerhof
A film to illustrate the new, anti-woman divorce seems.
Divorced women are angry, vengeful and egomaniac, because they take the poor fathers, right to child. But these men weeping women have done before they were so concealed. What other women to suffer from her ex-men, without dragging the children in the conflict, either.
It is literally mined area, the Douglas Wolfsperger enters with this documentation. As with almost any other topic the emotions boil immediately high when fathers complain that them is rendered impossible by the divorce of dealing with their own children by vindictive ex-wives, often with the support of youth courts and offices.
Wolfsperger has been through and the dispute over visiting rights with his daughter, he has met with other fathers with similar fate. Some of that he had brought for this film before the camera. It is striking how Wolfsperger emphasizing the masculinity of his protagonists in particular:
The policeman tells of his profession, the teacher is shown in the logging, the high earners in glider flying. Almost one has the impression that no one thinks, these men here about their feelings Talking it were sissies.
The personal concern Wolfsperger has therefore the starting point and method of his movie made and how not to expect, "the disenfranchised father" why a deliberately one-sided plea has become a kind of angry and yet sentimental outcry against the injustice of the practice of divorce law. The tales of woe, which reveal the fathers here are outrageous, in fact, and let the audience shake their heads about the extent of female treachery that runs against this father-child happiness to the field. be placed at the end of the film, in which grown men cry in front of the camera, one is almost ready, the beginning of a difficult to support humiliated father pronounced appeal, "the women to shoot for the moon." By then, however, you realize that sadness is not necessarily the best starting point for learning more about a topic. This "more" but could only be from the "other side" come, come here at any point to speak - to the cases of shattered. The woman occur, the Wolfsperger can he used as a clever lawyer as a witness of their own cause when he drives in the statement to see the father of her child only as a producer. The proverbial bull in a china shop remains: What is the relationship to happen to women that they end?
link to the article
My personal opinion about the father Wolfsperger and film:
Since me this topic Personally, I've now made my thoughts as a vulnerable child of divorce and because it is so here is a personally motivated film with its own perspective, allow me to express my personal opinion on this. After the SWR1 interview today I have come to the preliminary results (before the film's release): was raised
As in the film criticism already missing me in his film is a very important factor: an objective approach, where it is but be a documentary.
his story I have read up on his website (which unfortunately was removed in the meantime!) And I had the uncomfortable feeling that he wished to play down his personal outbursts and incontinence more likely. More it awakens in me the unpleasant impression that his main purpose was to do the ride until his "father right" file. This behavior is very human and you should then also stand by and do not gloss over anything. He is not authentic. Likewise, his film. Very little he wrote on his side as on his daughter, and I've missed completely, as he sees his daughter in all these disputes and how they must feel. That judge then take this father aside first surprised me, because of the incidents honestly do not. To put it in other words, as we know it needs always 2 parties to a marital dispute and if parents learn here not to finally differentiate that personal matters should not have to do the child you are, then the affected child suffers so the most.
The information that I could gather, I lack the important primary Misbehavior by him that there is not the one-sided condemnation of the other parent can really make something for the sake of his child and be so burdened child even more. It shows support for his film only a mother that fitted into his concept to his personal, subjective experience can be. Why it borders the other side in this movie? My guess: He says yes, it would be a "document for his daughter." In addition, he says: "Actually I do not know what a documentary is" (SWR1 Radio Interview of 10:06:09). I wonder now legitimately already, why he wants to "sell" this film now under the guise documentary, although the film from the outset this claim could never be fair? It probably has a lot to do with the public light lichen funding that made him get his former "comrade" and "Icon of the men's rights activists." Mind you, everyone, including single mothers, have co-funded propaganda anmutendend this "feature" as eligible "documentary".
But it is in all this is not really any question of guilt or self-knowledge of Mr. Wolfsperger. Rather, I always thought it's all about the child or children themselves, which still stands in all disputes arising out of focus, or not? Unfortunately, just leave this important aspect in its history, almost entirely ignored, I regret very much, because so only the one-sided perspective of a marginalized father is discussed. Strangely, he has changed his Homepage content between time and pulled out his own description. Probably because of the increasing criticism for the film before and I continue to wonder why he now can no longer stand to his own statements and turns with every interview like a flag in the wind? I have this procedure (only here as a new edition in the movie) is already in some fathers and mothers forums can watch for years (that is that typical gender war), and as we all know, has not really changed anything positive ever since.
This film is indeed the issue move back a bit more into the public what it means to be a concerned father, but not anymore. The important opportunity was missed to let everyone have their say (just affected fathers, but also the mothers and children). A comprehensive documentation would lead to much more that a rational discussion is set to the real benefit of the children in this country in transition where all parties can find themselves. This would then provide the important basic requirement, being able to meet each other again instead of continuing to put up the long worn-out model of "grave wars" that break the children of divorce even more is. This movie breaks my opinion, unfortunately, it is these trenches again, instead of building the necessary bridges long ago ...
EMUC
SWR1 radio interviews on the film's release "disenfranchised father:
Podcast DERABEND SWR1 10.06. Fathers after separation
Wednesday 10 June 2009 22:00
morning runs on the documentary, the father disposed of in theaters. Director Douglas Wolfsperger is a social Phenomenon to that found in the public eye, because there will men who are disposed of after a separation from their wives not only as partners but also as a father and the - often unsuccessfully - to fight for the relationship with their children. Four fathers describe their suffering and interviews in contact with their efforts. A mother justifies the refusal to deal from their perspective. Are these just isolated cases or are the fathers in fact often the losers when it comes to the children after a separation? We discuss, among other things: *
Wolfsperger Douglas (Director of the disenfranchised father) * Rainer
Sonneberg (of Fathers' Initiative for Children)
* Jürgen Rudolph, family court judge in Cochem and co-founder of
Cochemer practice
* EMUC (shelter ESK website)
Here the podcast (mp3 file download) are available at:
SWR1 The evening - fathers after separation (podcast has unfortunately removed from the SWR1 meantime!)
0 comments:
Post a Comment