Willravel

Have you men ever taken a child to a park? Ever felt like everyone else was staring at you, just waiting to dial 911 or call "To Catch a Predator"? It's not fun, and it's 100 times worse if you're a teacher.

...but that's not all...

Where do the kids go when there's a divorce? I read that 9/10 of children end up with the mother.

I've always done my best to fight sexism against women. I believe definitely that women should be treated with respect and should never be mistreated because of their gender. I also believe that men should be treated with respect and not mistreated because of our gender, too.

What can be done to break the bad with kids stigma?

Martian

I don't believe in feminism. Hell, I don't even believe in gender equality. I do believe in equal value, which is a subtle but important distinction.

Men and women are different. To attempt to deny this is, to me, absurd. I am 5'11" and weigh 160 lbs, which for a man is on the small side of average. One of my best friends, a woman, is the same height as me and thirty pounds lighter; we joke that she must be distantly descended from the amazons. She's considered very tall, for a woman. Thus, in light of these differences, it stands to reason that men are physiologically better suited to some tasks, as are women. We all know this; I don't think anybody has ever seriously suggested that men and women should compete on equal footing at the Olympic games, for example.

Yet, in some ways the human factor is much greater than the gender differences. Child rearing is one of those areas; a man can be just as loving, just as nurturing as a woman. Aside from a lack of breasts and a correlated inability to produce milk, there's nothing a woman is capable of when it comes to raising a child that a man can't also do equally well; and yet, as noted, men tend to be looked down on as single parents. It goes largely unchallenged in the legal sense that unless the mother has specific issues that prevent her from being a good parent (substance abuse problems, or something similar), she will provide a better environment for the child than the father. As far as I'm able to determine, this is an anachronism; while there have been very vocal groups advocating equality in favour of women, nobody is out there doing the same for men. There are very few organizations who are ready to stand up and say 'what about the guys?' Thus, women make strides towards equality in the job market, in sporting fields, in the military, and so on; while the traditionally female roles remain largely so. I am intimately familiar with the hospitals in my area, having most recently had two stays in the last six months; in those and every other visit I've made, I have met countless female doctors, but only one male nurse. I was impressed by his competence, but I couldn't help but wonder how much shit he has to deal with on a daily basis due solely to his gender.

I'm getting onto a bit of a tangent here, but the bottom line is that it is arbitrary and it is absurd. Men can provide for children. Men can create a loving, supportive environment for a child to grow up in. And yet, we tend to be viewed as a last resort. How to change this, I know not.

__________________
I wake up in the morning more tired than before I slept
I get through cryin' and I'm sadder than before I wept
I get through thinkin' now, and the thoughts have left my head
I get through speakin' and I can't remember, not a word that I said

- Ben Harper, Show Me A Little Shame

Ustwo

Eugenics or genetic alteration of the gender.

We are who we are and as a rule we work better in certain roles.

The problem with any of this is some women are crappy mothers and some men are great fathers, but the stereotype is based on a general truth.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Willravel

General truth? So you think that men are worse with kids than women?

Ustwo

Yes.

Edit: I should add worse with day to day detail stuff. My wife won't be able to teach my son some things I will, or have the same kind of relationship I will, but shes better with diapers and colds.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Willravel

Changing diapers is too difficult? You remove the diaper, wipe the butt, powder, and put on a new diaper. I suspect you're confusing wanting to do something with ability. No one wants to change a diaper.

Oh, and wash your hands.

MSD

I think that most people with kids are unfit parents (as a subset of my belief that the vast majority of people in society are idiots.) As far as gender balance goes, I think that the mothering instinct is an evolutionary trait that is still selected for, and that only in the past few generations has the value of a father who is equally capable of raising a child as the mother could been emphasized and accepted.

Ustwo

Can and do are two different things.

But then your original premise doesn't really hit a chord with me. I don't feel like I'm being singled out when I take my kid out on my own. No staring eyes waiting to dial 911, maybe you are just shifty looking

Sure a lot of guys get screwed in a divorce with the kids but thats what government systems tend to do, screw the individual for the lazy average. Yea maybe you are the best dad ever, but most guys are not and its easier to say you won't be either.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Plan9

As to why women are trusted more than men... anthropology might suggest this much: Men are the hunters of the pack. We are not the hearth. Society feels that we are out of our element when performing the role that the other side "maintains." We're too rough and violent, too competitive and impatient to providing the "nurturing environment" modern children require.

========================================================

Keep in mind: sex and gender are different things but not in this article.

Not exactly what I was looking for, but it'll do.

Women "make" the babies. We assume that this makes them good at taking care of them.

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

soma

Another example of sexism towards men is how homosexuality and bisexuality are accepted in men compared to women. But overall, this stuff doesn't bug me that much. I, for one, think we have it pretty good.

__________________
Having Girl Problems?

cj2112

This is a subject that hits close to home. up until recently I was a full time single Dad. My ex has had no involvement whatsoever in the kids lives. They were 4 and almost 2 when we split, and I have had them ever since. They are now 14 and almost 11.

I always found it uncomfortable when people would treat me like I was some kind of superhero because I love being Dad, and had full custody of my children. I believe that parenthood is an exercise in sacrifice, and it has taught me much.

Did I get some odd looks @ the park? I was too busy playing w/ my kids to care or notice if other people were watching me. I do see will's point, and I tend to agree, I just don't worry about that kind of stuff.

Plan9

In men: Weakness!

In women: I'll take two!

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

Baraka_Guru

I stopped watching television a while ago; are there many positive fictional representations of fathers in mass media? I've read that this is a bit of a problem. What do you think?

Traditional gender roles are a thing of the past. Society has changed, and we have to deal with it. Stay-at-home mom? A rare luxury. Stay-at-home dad? A freak occurrence. We are being squeezed to a point that makes the stereotypical middle-class '50s family look like a fantasy that never happened. Did it happen? In my own situation, if we ever have children, I think I'll be doing much of the childcare because I'm the one who can realistically work from home. It may seem counterintuitive if you consider evolutionary roles we come from (hunter vs. gatherer), but maybe this is what Darwin meant by the survival of the fittest. You either adapt, or you don't raise a family. It's up to you.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Plan9

Hoo-yeah, major problem. I don't own a television, but when I do see it... god, I feel like projectile vomiting. Look at any prime time pacification medium for your examples. Every male lead is a thickheaded moron who does "manly" things at the cost of neglecting or offending his wife, children, and friends.

Why do men watch that kinda crap? I'm offended if I just see the stupid ads.

Where are the intelligent, responsible, and non-violent XY heroes on TV?

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

Ustwo

My wife stays home and I work 8-5.

A stay at home mom is not a luxury, a working mom in a two income family is the luxury. Most people are unwilling to live their grandparents life style that allowed them the 50's family in the first place.

One car, kids work summer jobs every summer, home canning, very few trips to restaurants, TV as a luxury, small homes. Monthy cell phones, cable, internet, car payments etc all add up. A while ago we had someone post a whine about today vrs the 60's and if you took out all the optional stuff with a working mom the numbers were almost the same.

I work in an area that was a huge early 1950's post war subburb in Chicago. No young family would think of living in a homes that small, but 50 years ago it WAS the american dream.

Few are being squeezed through no fault of their own they are jumping into the juicer with both feet and a blindfold on.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Willravel

This being 2007 and not 1856, a two income house is actually more of a necessity than a luxury. My kids will go to 4+ year state or private colleges and have cars that work. I will be able to retire and not have to greet at Walmart.

Plan9

I'm guessing UsTwo makes enough money to compensate for his wife not working. God, how much did it cost me to get that last crown on #6? Both of my parents worked 20+ years for the US gummint and still couldn't buy me a car or send me to college. I had to fill sand bags and get shot at to afford my truck and the house I was going to share when I got back from the desert. The cost of living today dictates that most families have both parents working to support those silly things like the mortgage on their modestly sized home outside DC.

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

Strange Famous

Unless there is a real problem, children belong with their mother.

I think many (a high portion) of children have relationships with their father which are emotionally damaging.

Genetically, men are programmed for violence, and women to nuture. In a violent world, it is not surprising that the creature more violent is the one who often comes first.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

Ustwo

So you want cars for your kids and are looking at a private school? For a few grand you can set up with a state school early on. Which part of luxury is so hard to understand. Todays 'necessities' were yesterdays luxuries, the ones that even existed then.

I saw your truck, so thats not a luxury along with your bike eh?

Take a GOOD look at the 1950's lifestyle and tell me how that life style is a luxury these days.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Willravel

I had to pay every $ for my school not covered by scholarships. I've bought every car I've ever had. It made college a lot more difficult working a full time job and often taking upwards of 30 creds per semester.

Plan9

It wasn't a luxury, bro. It was a reward for giving up a year of my life. I did twice. I bought some toys with it. I'm paying my way through college without loans. In the end, I'd say that is a fair enough trade.

Just sign on the line, bro... you too can experience the joy of a year on another planet and come home to all these great "luxuries" we speak of here.

...

You stated the obvious: Yesterday's luxuries are today's necessities. Cars, cell phones, college educations.

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

Ustwo

No, they aren't. I'm not saying you didn't earn your truck, I'm saying you didn't need it. They are luxuries by definition.

Now if you got that truck, and then whined about not being able to pay your rent and how hard it is, then you deserve a reality bitch slap.

I'm all for luxuries, the more the better, but I'm sick of people who decide that things are harder now than in the past without a clue about what they are talking about.

And no most of what you listed are not necessities they are in fact luxuries, its only because 'everyone else has them' that it becomes a need in peoples minds. Then they can all bitch about how expensive life is as if they weren't doing it to themselves.

I have two living grandmothers who grew up during the depression and had their kids in the 40's 50's.

A luxury to the first, was meat twice a week, and there was the one kid who drove to school when one was in highschool. A luxury to the second was pretty much the same. One never had a lot of money in the 50's and lived pretty much as I described. The other did, my grandfather used to be a major executive for a very well known company, they had a 'big' house. That house is smaller than most of the starter homes bought by young 2 income families today where I live.

People today seem to think their means should fit their lifestyle, not the other way around.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Plan9

Ugh, articulating points in this thread are incredibly painful for my small brain.

The electric light bulb is a luxury in many parts of Afghanistan. We have nothing new and amazing to say about that, do we?

The US is a land of luxury. While I didn't need this particular mid range GM vehicle, I did need an automobile. No, wait... I guess I didn't need an automobile... and I guess we don't need electricity either. The luxury continuum game is fun in the United States because we're at the far end of it. The land where nobody who talks is humble.

...

I didn't suggest things are harder. Far from the truth, I believe. Quality of life is through the roof for most. We live in, as Madonna / Fight Club / QVC would suggest, the material world. I believe that "cost" and "perceived need" move together in a diagonal pattern on a chart, and balance out over time despite increase in both. This isn't positive or negative, although I certainly see materialism as a disease. Societal expectations of required qualifications to maintain this level of luxury increase (nearly) proportionally with the crap we claim to need to function.

Does this make sense or am I full of shit?

I'm leaving out "poor people," I think.

...

Question: What do you call a kid with a four year degree in __program__?

Answer: A kid who needs more college.

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

Baraka_Guru

I take the blame for using the word luxury in the wrong context. What I meant was: luxury of choice. I don't think Baraka_Gurl and I have the "luxury" to choose one of us to stay at home unless I can figure out a way to do so while working. I will not be "house husband" (or "house common-law partner"). I think it is much more difficult to be a stay-at-home parent today if you live in a city, where living expenses tend to be high even if you don't have today's "necessities," as it were.

And for the record, I'd love to live in a '50s-sized house, but it would set me back $300,000+ here in Toronto. To not partake in today's "luxuries" would be to not partake in much that culture has to offer. Think of being without satellite television and high-speed Internet. Much of what's going on today in terms of the "vanguard of culture" is happening through these channels. Mind you, I tend to stay away from much of this, but this is why I tend to feel like I live under a rock when I'm in a group of people chatting about the current thing.

But back to the OP, and a comment made by Strange Famous: "Genetically, men are programmed for violence, and women to nurture." It's this kind of thinking that has created the problem in the first place. Cultural theorists would call this line of thought binary oppositional. This implies that men are not inclined to nurture and that women are not inclined to be violent, both of which are false. If you think about it from a evolutionary standpoint, women aren't looking for a man's violent tendencies when selecting a mate. His ability to bond and nurture is a factor. Humans have an adolescent phase far longer than most animals, which is why this binary opposition doesn't make sense--it is at least far too oversimplified. Yes, men are often violent and can come across as emotionally reserved, but they stick around to raise children for several reasons.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Plan9

Yeah, we need someone to fetch beers from the refrigerator.

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

kurty[B]

I just wanted to quote this, and get the discussion back to the topic and not about paying for your own college, and 1950's traditional family values.

I think the male being a horrible single parent stigma is slowly going away. I'm going to keep my personal life out of this topic as it's all very new to me, but I know a man who would've been a magnificent father, and is a magnificent grandfather, but 24 years ago the courts were so oldfashioned they only gave him every other weekend, and every time his daughter does something unbelievable I wish she had spent more time with her father growing up rather than her mother who has done some unbelievable things also. Each case is different, I just wish more parents would be able to work out a co-parenting solution rather than a me against you single parenting solution.

I hope i have the same problem as cj2112 and don't notice if people are staring at me. I'd rather be playing and enjoying my time with my child than wondering what other people think.

The only thing I can do to change the stigma is do the best I can with my child and other children. After many a social gatherings with children present I've been told "you're so good with children!" plenty of times. I'm not trying to make up for all the other assholes in the world who have created that stigma, I'm just going to do my own thing and not worry about those stigmas.

__________________
In the Absence of Information People Make Things Up.