Real Men Provide

mrussel1

HughFreakingDillon said:

my mom quit work when my brother was born. she went back to work when we were old enough to come home from school without supervision.

that said, the dad-goes-to-work and mom-stays-at-home is an antiquated notion based on nothing but the oppression of women by the patriarchal state and was allowed because you simply did not need two incomes to survive back then.

individual circumstances and upbringings are irrelevant to this discussion. that's not objective.

there are no natural "roles" based on gender. that is society-induced. in my world, men and women are equal and whatever works for their family is what works for their family.

let's reverse that billboard and state what it's really saying:

Real Women submit to her husband's every whim
Real Men take advantage of that

how the hell is that not offensive?

You don't think women are more naturally caring an nurturing that men? I'm not saying every one fits that mold, but by and large that's true in my experience. My daughters took to being a mother with baby dolls and animals right from the start. My son never practiced being a dad. He couldn't give a shit about anything but violence. Maybe there's some nurture there, but we never encouraged or discouraged certain behaviors.
Don't we see certain roles play out in mammals across the animal spectrum?

My wife was thrilled to stay home with our kids for several years and then she wanted to go back to work. Now she'd like to quit working again, frankly. But at the end of the day, women's liberation is the right, freedom and opportunity to work OR stay home without being judged. It's just as wrong to judge a woman who wants to be a homemaker as it is one who doesn't.

oftenreading

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

my mom quit work when my brother was born. she went back to work when we were old enough to come home from school without supervision.

that said, the dad-goes-to-work and mom-stays-at-home is an antiquated notion based on nothing but the oppression of women by the patriarchal state and was allowed because you simply did not need two incomes to survive back then.

individual circumstances and upbringings are irrelevant to this discussion. that's not objective.

there are no natural "roles" based on gender. that is society-induced. in my world, men and women are equal and whatever works for their family is what works for their family.

let's reverse that billboard and state what it's really saying:

Real Women submit to her husband's every whim
Real Men take advantage of that

how the hell is that not offensive?

You don't think women are more naturally caring an nurturing that men? I'm not saying every one fits that mold, but by and large that's true in my experience. My daughters took to being a mother with baby dolls and animals right from the start. My son never practiced being a dad. He couldn't give a shit about anything but violence. Maybe there's some nurture there, but we never encouraged or discouraged certain behaviors.
Don't we see certain roles play out in mammals across the animal spectrum?

My wife was thrilled to stay home with our kids for several years and then she wanted to go back to work. Now she'd like to quit working again, frankly. But at the end of the day, women's liberation is the right, freedom and opportunity to work OR stay home without being judged. It's just as wrong to judge a woman who wants to be a homemaker as it is one who doesn't.

You may think you never encouraged or discouraged those behaviours, but that's incredibly hard not to do. Inadvertently, even subconsciously, we reinforce or discourage behaviours in children by what we pay attention to, what we ignore, what we choose to discourage, what we actively punish. And setting aside the influence of parents, there is the influence of society, which we have no control over. Even how grandparents, for instance, interact with our kids. I guarantee you that if you have a baby girl you will have no shortage of people telling her how cute and pretty she is, or even (gag) what a "flirt" she is. If you have a baby boy, people will ooh and aah over how strong he is and be delighted if he even so much as picks up a toy hammer.

There are certainly some broad differences in brain development and behaviour, but not as much as most would believe.

mrussel1

oftenreading said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

my mom quit work when my brother was born. she went back to work when we were old enough to come home from school without supervision.

that said, the dad-goes-to-work and mom-stays-at-home is an antiquated notion based on nothing but the oppression of women by the patriarchal state and was allowed because you simply did not need two incomes to survive back then.

individual circumstances and upbringings are irrelevant to this discussion. that's not objective.

there are no natural "roles" based on gender. that is society-induced. in my world, men and women are equal and whatever works for their family is what works for their family.

let's reverse that billboard and state what it's really saying:

Real Women submit to her husband's every whim
Real Men take advantage of that

how the hell is that not offensive?

You don't think women are more naturally caring an nurturing that men? I'm not saying every one fits that mold, but by and large that's true in my experience. My daughters took to being a mother with baby dolls and animals right from the start. My son never practiced being a dad. He couldn't give a shit about anything but violence. Maybe there's some nurture there, but we never encouraged or discouraged certain behaviors.
Don't we see certain roles play out in mammals across the animal spectrum?

My wife was thrilled to stay home with our kids for several years and then she wanted to go back to work. Now she'd like to quit working again, frankly. But at the end of the day, women's liberation is the right, freedom and opportunity to work OR stay home without being judged. It's just as wrong to judge a woman who wants to be a homemaker as it is one who doesn't.

You may think you never encouraged or discouraged those behaviours, but that's incredibly hard not to do. Inadvertently, even subconsciously, we reinforce or discourage behaviours in children by what we pay attention to, what we ignore, what we choose to discourage, what we actively punish. And setting aside the influence of parents, there is the influence of society, which we have no control over. Even how grandparents, for instance, interact with our kids. I guarantee you that if you have a baby girl you will have no shortage of people telling her how cute and pretty she is, or even (gag) what a "flirt" she is. If you have a baby boy, people will ooh and aah over how strong he is and be delighted if he even so much as picks up a toy hammer.

There are certainly some broad differences in brain development and behaviour, but not as much as most would believe.

What about the roles that occur in nature for different mammals?
I'm sure you are right that there are subtle encouragement or discouragement that may be inadvertent and they do reinforce roles. Part of me asks "is that so bad?" or like I said above, isn't that playing out all over nature? I guess for me it's only bad when you force someone to do something that they are uncomfortable with doing or is going against their personal nature.

RoleModelsinBlood31

I'm all for post traditional families. Two men raising a kid, two women raising a child, a half human cyborg raising two children, a man who used to be a woman raising a dog, a cat raising a snake, and only robots in the kitchen.

HughFreakingDillon

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

my mom quit work when my brother was born. she went back to work when we were old enough to come home from school without supervision.

that said, the dad-goes-to-work and mom-stays-at-home is an antiquated notion based on nothing but the oppression of women by the patriarchal state and was allowed because you simply did not need two incomes to survive back then.

individual circumstances and upbringings are irrelevant to this discussion. that's not objective.

there are no natural "roles" based on gender. that is society-induced. in my world, men and women are equal and whatever works for their family is what works for their family.

let's reverse that billboard and state what it's really saying:

Real Women submit to her husband's every whim
Real Men take advantage of that

how the hell is that not offensive?

You don't think women are more naturally caring an nurturing that men? I'm not saying every one fits that mold, but by and large that's true in my experience. My daughters took to being a mother with baby dolls and animals right from the start. My son never practiced being a dad. He couldn't give a shit about anything but violence. Maybe there's some nurture there, but we never encouraged or discouraged certain behaviors.
Don't we see certain roles play out in mammals across the animal spectrum?

My wife was thrilled to stay home with our kids for several years and then she wanted to go back to work. Now she'd like to quit working again, frankly. But at the end of the day, women's liberation is the right, freedom and opportunity to work OR stay home without being judged. It's just as wrong to judge a woman who wants to be a homemaker as it is one who doesn't.

I think we've been bred to be that way over the centuries. I can't say one way or the other which gender "should" be more nurturing. It is probably the female, as by and large, in nature, MOST females are the nurturing ones, with some exceptions.

If you give a baby a doll or a spiderman action figure, it won't know the difference. My daughters, especially my older one after the young one was born, learned to copy what she was doing with the baby. it was adorable. But I don't know how a young girl would act towards a baby doll had she had zero prior experience or visuals of any of that stuff. But that's obviously an experiment that would be impossible and immoral to undertake.

My point is, those rules no longer apply. Humans, as a species, don't need to fall into their naturally ocurring tendencies like other animals do. They have instinctual roles. So do we, but we also have choice.

The discussion here, I believe, is not what is natural to our genders, but what societal norms of the "traditional sect" are still trying to influence us with.

dankind

mrussel1 said:

oftenreading said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

my mom quit work when my brother was born. she went back to work when we were old enough to come home from school without supervision.

that said, the dad-goes-to-work and mom-stays-at-home is an antiquated notion based on nothing but the oppression of women by the patriarchal state and was allowed because you simply did not need two incomes to survive back then.

individual circumstances and upbringings are irrelevant to this discussion. that's not objective.

there are no natural "roles" based on gender. that is society-induced. in my world, men and women are equal and whatever works for their family is what works for their family.

let's reverse that billboard and state what it's really saying:

Real Women submit to her husband's every whim
Real Men take advantage of that

how the hell is that not offensive?

You don't think women are more naturally caring an nurturing that men? I'm not saying every one fits that mold, but by and large that's true in my experience. My daughters took to being a mother with baby dolls and animals right from the start. My son never practiced being a dad. He couldn't give a shit about anything but violence. Maybe there's some nurture there, but we never encouraged or discouraged certain behaviors.
Don't we see certain roles play out in mammals across the animal spectrum?

My wife was thrilled to stay home with our kids for several years and then she wanted to go back to work. Now she'd like to quit working again, frankly. But at the end of the day, women's liberation is the right, freedom and opportunity to work OR stay home without being judged. It's just as wrong to judge a woman who wants to be a homemaker as it is one who doesn't.

You may think you never encouraged or discouraged those behaviours, but that's incredibly hard not to do. Inadvertently, even subconsciously, we reinforce or discourage behaviours in children by what we pay attention to, what we ignore, what we choose to discourage, what we actively punish. And setting aside the influence of parents, there is the influence of society, which we have no control over. Even how grandparents, for instance, interact with our kids. I guarantee you that if you have a baby girl you will have no shortage of people telling her how cute and pretty she is, or even (gag) what a "flirt" she is. If you have a baby boy, people will ooh and aah over how strong he is and be delighted if he even so much as picks up a toy hammer.

There are certainly some broad differences in brain development and behaviour, but not as much as most would believe.

What about the roles that occur in nature for different mammals?
I'm sure you are right that there are subtle encouragement or discouragement that may be inadvertent and they do reinforce roles. Part of me asks "is that so bad?" or like I said above, isn't that playing out all over nature? I guess for me it's only bad when you force someone to do something that they are uncomfortable with doing or is going against their personal nature.

Every time my four-year-old son whines, fusses, cries or sobs, I grab my nuts and growl at him.

oftenreading

What is "natural" for mammals in terms of nurturing young is completely confounded by the fact that female mammals provide milk to their young. It's part of the definition of mammals. Sometimes there is really no nurturing beyond that, and sometimes there is. Mammalian young are often kicked out when they are done nursing, but not always. If you argue that providing milk is more nurturing, then yes, you're correct. That doesn't speak to any other aspect of nurturing young, though.

Within birds, who of course don't provide milk, it's almost always the males doing the feeding and nurturing.

mrussel1

dankind said:

mrussel1 said:

oftenreading said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

my mom quit work when my brother was born. she went back to work when we were old enough to come home from school without supervision.

that said, the dad-goes-to-work and mom-stays-at-home is an antiquated notion based on nothing but the oppression of women by the patriarchal state and was allowed because you simply did not need two incomes to survive back then.

individual circumstances and upbringings are irrelevant to this discussion. that's not objective.

there are no natural "roles" based on gender. that is society-induced. in my world, men and women are equal and whatever works for their family is what works for their family.

let's reverse that billboard and state what it's really saying:

Real Women submit to her husband's every whim
Real Men take advantage of that

how the hell is that not offensive?

You don't think women are more naturally caring an nurturing that men? I'm not saying every one fits that mold, but by and large that's true in my experience. My daughters took to being a mother with baby dolls and animals right from the start. My son never practiced being a dad. He couldn't give a shit about anything but violence. Maybe there's some nurture there, but we never encouraged or discouraged certain behaviors.
Don't we see certain roles play out in mammals across the animal spectrum?

My wife was thrilled to stay home with our kids for several years and then she wanted to go back to work. Now she'd like to quit working again, frankly. But at the end of the day, women's liberation is the right, freedom and opportunity to work OR stay home without being judged. It's just as wrong to judge a woman who wants to be a homemaker as it is one who doesn't.

You may think you never encouraged or discouraged those behaviours, but that's incredibly hard not to do. Inadvertently, even subconsciously, we reinforce or discourage behaviours in children by what we pay attention to, what we ignore, what we choose to discourage, what we actively punish. And setting aside the influence of parents, there is the influence of society, which we have no control over. Even how grandparents, for instance, interact with our kids. I guarantee you that if you have a baby girl you will have no shortage of people telling her how cute and pretty she is, or even (gag) what a "flirt" she is. If you have a baby boy, people will ooh and aah over how strong he is and be delighted if he even so much as picks up a toy hammer.

There are certainly some broad differences in brain development and behaviour, but not as much as most would believe.

What about the roles that occur in nature for different mammals?
I'm sure you are right that there are subtle encouragement or discouragement that may be inadvertent and they do reinforce roles. Part of me asks "is that so bad?" or like I said above, isn't that playing out all over nature? I guess for me it's only bad when you force someone to do something that they are uncomfortable with doing or is going against their personal nature.

Every time my four-year-old son whines, fusses, cries or sobs, I grab my nuts and growl at him.

You're obviously not doing it enough since it's clear he keeps doing it.

mrussel1

oftenreading said:

What is "natural" for mammals in terms of nurturing young is completely confounded by the fact that female mammals provide milk to their young. It's part of the definition of mammals. Sometimes there is really no nurturing beyond that, and sometimes there is. Mammalian young are often kicked out when they are done nursing, but not always. If you argue that providing milk is more nurturing, then yes, you're correct. That doesn't speak to any other aspect of nurturing young, though.

Within birds, who of course don't provide milk, it's almost always the males doing the feeding and nurturing.

Which is the same for human mothers.. the milk piece. And that's why I was very specific about mammals. I'm not arguing that there's isn't a societal influence, but perhaps the nature led to that 'nurture' piece.

dankind

My wife took some personality test at work, and she scored laughably low on all the empathy stuff.

benjs

dankind said:

My wife took some personality test at work, and she scored laughably low on all the empathy stuff.

And on the opposite side of the spectrum, when I took an assessment at an engineering firm I worked at a few years back, I showed up in the 99th percentile for empathy. General trends are still just trends, and outliers still exist!

HughFreakingDillon

benjs said:

dankind said:

My wife took some personality test at work, and she scored laughably low on all the empathy stuff.

And on the opposite side of the spectrum, when I took an assessment at an engineering firm I worked at a few years back, I showed up in the 99th percentile for empathy. General trends are still just trends, and outliers still exist!

I'm probably right there with you benjs. I tear up at facebook cute-puppy videos. LOL

RoleModelsinBlood31

I obviously was messing around above. This issue isn't an issue to me, I take the live and let live approach and don't feel the need to tell others how to live their family life. Do what works for eachother and in the end just give our kids the best home you can.

oftenreading

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

I obviously was messing around above. This issue isn't an issue to me, I take the live and let live approach and don't feel the need to tell others how to live their family life. Do what works for eachother and in the end just give our kids the best home you can.

Can I still get the robot in the kitchen?

buck502000

Take the red pill

rgambs

??

tweedyfanjen

I guess women who are single and childless are just shit out of luck.

HughFreakingDillon

tweedyfanjen said:

I guess women who are single and childless are just shit out of luck.

no shit. nothing to appreciate and no one to serve.

Bentleyspop

tweedyfanjen said:

I guess women who are single and childless are just shit out of luck.

Yup
Can't be housewives..... the world's greatest profession

cp3iverson

Bentleyspop said:

tweedyfanjen said:

I guess women who are single and childless are just shit out of luck.

Yup
Can't be housewives..... the world's greatest profession

Its a blessing to be able to have my wife stay home, take care of the kids, teach them, be with them, keep the house beautiful, etc. So vital at those young ages. Obviously it has to fit your situation but a housewife/stay at home mom is a super hard job and way more important IMO than any career that the wife (or husband) is not partaking in. Again, it depends on the situation. Being a good parent is hard work no matter how you have to pull it off. I just have a ton of respect for what she does.