September 7, 2010

"[T]he question is not why do men stay for boys, but rather why mothers of daughters are divorcing more than mothers of sons."

Relax, they've figured out a female-favoring reason why couples with daughters are more likely to divorce than couples with sons. The old explanation that fathers prefer boys must give way to the new explanation: With a daughter at home, being good and supportive as daughters tend to be, a woman has less need for a husband. There, now, aren't you so much happier? The universe makes sense. Women, good. Men, bad.

100 comments:

knox said...

I have a son who's five and, young as he is, I can't imagine raising him without a dad. The results of spending time with his father are unquestionably valuable, and positively affect every aspect of his happiness and confidence. And he also gets tons of experiences and skills that he just wouldn't get from me: doing guy stuff and talking about guy things, reading guy books and watching guy TV shows.

And guess what? The same applies for my daughter. The popular wisdom that fathers are "optional" is sad and sick. I feel terrible for boys and/or girls growing up without dads.

MadisonMan said...

Parents of girls are 5 percent more likely to divorce than parents of boys.

When you have a girl, the synchronized PMS-ing drives the men away.

I'm surprised the female scientists overlooked this possibility.

that-xmas said...

Or more likely, mothers get jealous of the attention paid to another woman (their daughters).

They realize that they are no longer special, and that their husbands can love another woman as much as themselves.

Since women are allowed to keep two competing emotions in their heads at once (unlike men), women can still love their daughters even though the daughters are stealing their husbands love from them.

Scott M said...

You.

Have.

Got.

To.

Be.

Fucking.

Kidding.

Me.

blake said...

It's science!

Hagar said...

My experience have been that fathers dote on their daughters and mothers on their sons, while being quite sceptical of offspring of their own sex.

We remember our own behavior when we were young, while the other sex was mysterious and different.

Larry J said...

My daughter-in-law Heidi is the oldest of three daughters in her family (and yes, her parents are still married). Both times when Heidi was pregnant with our grandchildren, she hoped for sons instead of daughters. She said, "Girls are too much drama."

Fortunately, she gave birth to two boys.

Perhaps the girls = drama aspect is a factor, or perhaps this is yet another case where "correlation does not prove causality" holds true.

Scott M said...

I have two son (oldest and youngest) with two daughters in between. I was raised in a family of all boys. I will admit that some of the things involved with raising girls (mine are 6 and 2) kind of wierds me out, but that's what mom is for. Likewise, there are things about boys that I'll have to step up to the plate for.

I see no reason, though, why I would split over those things indicative to gender. It's a ridiculous observation more than likely made by someone with plenty of time to do research due to a lack of having a family of their own.

Quayle said...

The writer for the Times, Lisa Belkin, appears not to know that she is working with an incomplete data set to be able to decide on either postulate.

In order to make sense of whether the man's thinking or the woman's thinking is material, we need to know whether it was the man or the woman primarily seeking the divorce.

But on this data alone I could come up with an answer that is exactly opposite to the "men bad, woman good" interpretation that Ann points out:

Women are selfish and stupid. The more women in a family, the more selfish and stupider the decisions. QED.

Shanna said...

Maybe because girls are more expensive?

My experience have been that fathers dote on their daughters and mothers on their sons, while being quite sceptical of offspring of their own sex.

I have seen this as well. I would be interested to see if families were more harmonious with mixed gender children (ie, a boy and a girl) or with single gender children. I have a brother, not a sister, and from what I've seen of sisters, they are a lot of drama. There are benefits, too, but still. Brothers are more peaceful (caveat, until they get married and bring in SIL's!)

Quayle said...

BTW, "more selfish and stupider" is a term of art.

Pogo said...

"...why mothers of daughters are divorcing more than mothers of sons."

I think it's to make up for the gender wage gap.

Jennifer said...

knox is absolutely right. And I say this as the mother of both a son and a daughter whose father is unfortunately gone a good half of the time.

Five percent doesn't sound like a huge variance, but given that couples with only daughters must be proportionally quite a bit less than couples with sons and daughters and couples with only sons, I wonder what the actual variance is.

Scott M said...

I'm not convinced about the more expensive part, although that may dovetail with what I was going to say.

Girls are more complicated. That's not a good thing from a man's point of view. All the old stand-up stand-by's about a man just wanting peace and quite, the archtypical male advice to other men to just agree with the (again to promote peace and harmony) and the old schtick:

Woman: What are you thinking about?
Man: (internally) Am I hungry? Am I horny? No? (externally) Nothing.

...has some truth, as most good comedy does.

Dealing with the little drama queens, as well as all the boys/young men/pigs that will inevitably start to prey on them is not something your average man looks forward to, but rather puts up with. BUT YOU DO because you are a responsible, loving father. Period.

XWL said...

Hmmm, President Obama has two daughters, and a mother-in-law under his roof. Michelle has a whole heap of 'support', then. She should probably dump that loser she's with.

A president getting divorced while in office could be entertaining...

Scott M said...

A president getting divorced while in office could be entertaining...

LOL

I was going to say that it won't happen until the first gay president, but then it struck me. Can't you just hear the news media touting the first lesbian woman black president? Hopefully we'll have done away with identity politics by then...it would be the greatest gift we could give to our kids.

Back to the original point, the first president to get divorced while in office will be a gay man. This goes along with my long-held belief that the worst thing to ever happen to gay men is the gay man.

Scott M said...

Hoisted by my own snark.

first lesbian woman black president is redundant, of course. But some talking head getting leg tingles about the first lesbian black president is still funny as hell to me.

WV - "borps" - submarine weapons that use methane as a propellant.

MnMark said...

My guess for the difference in divorce rates would be that since women initiate 2/3 of divorces, the answer more likely lies in women's motivations...and would expect that women with son's are somewhat reluctant to divorce, knowing that they may not be able to control a son themselves, and that there may be some women who divorce to protect a daughter from abuse.

Deirdre Mundy said...

Hmm.. I always thought the reason was that pubescent girls are REALLY hard to live with...

And that the constant stress leads to fighting...

and it's easier to blame each other than to say "Gosh! Our girls are nuts right now! But if we can make it through the next 3 years, things will even out..."

Scott M said...

Gosh! Our girls are nuts right now! But if we can make it through the next 3 years, things will even out...

Spot on. That's torn right from the pages of my mid-life crisis.

Pogo said...

We aren't supposed to mention that adolescents are insane. Girls can be especially hard, but boys aren't any big treat.

But the left's degradation of the family, and its complete dissolution among blacks, has been nearly a complete success. So just when the going gets tough, parents bolt. And why not? There's no consequence for it.

MadisonMan said...

We aren't supposed to mention that adolescents are insane.

My wife and I frequently look at each other in bemusement, one or both of us rolling our eyes, as adolescent fury storms through the house.

Der Hahn said...

ok, antecdote is not data but my experience differs. Ex-wife's track record is marriage #1 - divorce with no kids, marriage #2 (me) - have a son and get a divorce, marriage #3 - have a daughter and still married. Ex-SO had three daughters but stayed married until they were grown.

And I'll second the opinion that in general men stay. Period. Regardless of the sex of the children, if any.

raf said...

being good and supportive as daughters tend to be

And where does one find such daughters? In this century, I mean.

Bruce Hayden said...

First, most women cannot successfully raise boys. Which is why most of the guys in prison were not raised with their father in the house.

Secondly, a woman may not get her son in a divorce, but will assuredly get her daughter, if she makes even a token attempt to do so. One the one hand, the statistics are clear about single mothers trying to raise boys. On the other, (and absent any hard statistics), the courts, social workers, etc. invariably decide that girls need their mothers.

blake said...

>>And where does one find such daughters? In this century, I mean.

My house.

Drew said...

Huh. As a dad with two daughters (5 and 6) my first response is that maybe it's not the moms deciding they don't need the dads, but the dads deciding they can't deal with the drama.

I love my daughters, but I have already mentioned to my wife that when they're teenagers I may be spending an inordinate amount of time in my man-den.

With the door locked.

And the television up loud so I won't hear all three of them screaming at each other.

I have no intention of bailing out, but I already get a sense that it's gonna be ugly.

victoria said...

I have a daughter, now 24. I could not see raising her without her father, my husband. He gave her his perspective on life and school and education that was somewhat different from my experiences and invaluable to her. They love each other, though sometimes communication is "interesting". I adore her and, though she is 3000 miles away, feel as close to her as when she was living at home.


Vicki from Pasadena

John said...

"being good and supportive as daughters tend to be"

What a joke. Most mothers and daughters fight like wild animals.

Pogo said...

I reassert my wish that one of the United States, say, North Dakota, become completely walled and serve as a camp for teenagers, separated by sex.

Release only on proof of adult thinking.

Scott M said...

Release only on proof of adult thinking.

They must first survive calling and riding Shai-Hulud...or whatever the North Dakota version of a giant sandworm is...a giant walleye maybe?

David said...

"Women, good. Men, bad."

No woman, no cry.

Pogo said...

"...a giant walleye maybe?"

Or carp, those nasty buggers.

Joe said...

Pogo, there is a problem with your suggestion...
Minot AFB is in N Dakota....that would be the Fifth Bomb Wing and the 91st Missile Wing.

Really, the thought of all those teens with access to nuclear weapons...well it is disturbing

ricpic said...

According to the article 3/4's of divorces are initiated by women. Women leaving men. And what's the reason? "Mens bad behavior." It's not enough for women to destroy men; it has to be mens fault.

Tari said...

Having been one of the victims of my mother in her divorce schemes, I have to agree with the article. My mom definitely manipulated me into providing emotional support for her post-divorce, not to mention the fact that she didn't cook a meal, wash a dish, do the laundry or clean the house from the time I was 13 until I left for college. So yes, a woman bent on divorcing her husband can easily convince herself that "my daughter and I will do this together - we're a team".

Guess which of my parents I speak to now, at 40?

Dead Julius said...

What is this-- a Stuff White People Like version of Dr. Phil?

It's a 5% statistical gap... just big enough to give the NY Times an opportunity for all its liberal educated readers to adapt their own personal narrative into a pseudo-scientific explanation.

...And small enough to be, in the big picture, meaningless.

The issues of parenting and marriage are huge. And individual. Exactly the sort of domain where statistics mean nothing and individual choice means everything.

Dead Julius said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Pogo said...

"...And small enough to be, in the big picture, meaningless."

My current status on Facebook.

ricpic said...

ricpic: Hey Pogo, it hurts when I do this.

Pogo: Then don't do "this."

Another instant cure courtesy our own take no prisoners Pogo.

Big Mike said...

Women, good. Men, bad.

Did you run that conclusion past Meade?

HT said...

Blogger Drew said...

Huh. As a dad with two daughters (5 and 6) my first response is that maybe it's not the moms deciding they don't need the dads, but the dads deciding they can't deal with the drama.

I love my daughters, but I have already mentioned to my wife that when they're teenagers I may be spending an inordinate amount of time in my man-den.

With the door locked.

And the television up loud so I won't hear all three of them screaming at each other.

I have no intention of bailing out, but I already get a sense that it's gonna be ugly.
________


Why are you already giving in? Why not establish some rituals NOW, and (key) insist that they stay in place until they are at least 20? Rituals that allow you ALL to spend time together and that allow you to become blissfully unaware of mini dramas in each of your lives? Like, cooking together? Studying together? Singing together? Gardening together? Working together? Set a pattern to your day that you must follow. Sure, it takes discipline but wouldn't it be worth a future where you're not going deaf by the loud television?

I don't know. I don't get it. Sorry. I guess I'm just in a mood. (Women)

lucid said...

"Women good. Men bad."

Phew--now that we've got that clear, everything else makes sense.

traditionalguy said...

Cherchez la femme. The power of coming into their sexual prime of the 16 to 23 year old daughters can blow up many stable relationships. The daughters are destined to leave and reproduce. The sons are not able to as yet until they have employment. Also the mothers are often times secretly envious enough of the daughter to want to go out and show that they can still compete for men's attention too.

Pogo said...

My Dad used to tell that joke every time we got together.

I told a colleague that, and he looked surprised, and said he had himself said exactly that to a patient once. And it wasn't my dear old Dad.

Scott M said...

Women, good. Men, bad.

Did you run that conclusion past Meade?


Wouldn't that be, "Women, good. Men's shorts, bad"?

WV - "thentele" - what's on TV tomorrow

Pogo said...

"Cherchez la femme."

Churchy LaFemme


...from the old Pogo strip.

dbp said...

If a woman becomes sick-and-tired of the kind of crap a guy can dish-out; she gains little from divorce if she is stuck with a passel of little crap-dishing sons.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

The power of coming into their sexual prime of the 16 to 23 year old daughters can blow up many stable relationships

This makes my husband a saint. I was a divorced woman with a 13 year old daughter when started dating and then got married.

I give him huge kudos for being a great stepfather and putting up with TWO hormonal women in the same house. He was also able to retain his sanity during the 'teen years'. Me....not so much. lol

dbp said...

By the same token: If a husband is sick of feminine drama, he gets rid of both the wife kind and the daughter kind in one divorce.

Kirk Parker said...

Pogo, you *really* think North Dakota will be big enough?

Pogo said...

Kirk, it depends on how many clothes the girls bring. If uniforms are used, no problem.

But we could likely use a secondary site for the problem kids in Frostbite Falls, Minnesota..

The Crack Emcee said...

I just think women are crueler than men. I'm not saying men can't be dogs but, when that happens in the sphere of "normal", we know they're fucked up.

Women, on the other hand, exhibit something else in the sphere of "normal": That Praying Mantis thing. That I've-got-too-many-puppies-so-I'll-ruthlessly-kill-one thing. That I'm-dissatisfied-by-I-don't-know-what-so-I'll-leave-my-husband-with-nothing thing.

Like the unvarnished behavior of gays, it's a topic few discuss.

Shanna said...

That I've-got-too-many-puppies-so-I'll-ruthlessly-kill-one thing.

I suspect you'll find boys more likely to kill a puppy for any reason than girls. Now if you're talking about a 13 year old betty destroying susie because she got on her nerves one day, than I'll agree with that. Boys are more forgiving, less devious in that respect (mostly).

ironrailsironweights said...

Shaved women are far more likely to leave their husbands.

Peter

Ralph L said...

a woman becomes sick-and-tired of the kind of crap a guy can dish-out
It isn't the crap, it's the farting.

Ralph L said...

Shaved women are far more likely to leave their husbands
They get the itch, with a capital "I".

Whiskey Jim said...

My guess for the difference in divorce rates would be that since women initiate 2/3 of divorces, the answer more likely lies in women's motivations...and would expect that women with son's are somewhat reluctant to divorce, knowing that they may not be able to control a son themselves...

I like this. I gave up my career to remain near my 3 year old son when my wife left. Two years later they still don't get along very well, but it has improved.

In my humble experience, unlike 50 years ago and a larger nuclear family, many mothers are harried by boyhood behavior.

sonicfrog said...

Too many questions today.

The Crack Emcee said...

Shanna,

"I suspect you'll find boys more likely to kill a puppy for any reason than girls."

I beg to differ.

Along with all the other bullshit in women's heads, even their vision of themselves is delusional.

Drew said...

Why are you already giving in? Why not establish some rituals NOW, and (key) insist that they stay in place until they are at least 20? Rituals that allow you ALL to spend time together and that allow you to become blissfully unaware of mini dramas in each of your lives? Like, cooking together? Studying together? Singing together? Gardening together? Working together? Set a pattern to your day that you must follow. Sure, it takes discipline but wouldn't it be worth a future where you're not going deaf by the loud television?

It was sort of a joke. But at the same time a recognition of that the drama happens even now when there are a pair of 5 and 6-year-old women in the house.

Of course, it's hard for you (or anyone) to judge my fathering skills by just one quick off-the-cuff comment about the screaming fits that I fully expect to happen when my kids are teenagers. Which is why I joke about it with my wife now, because she totally expects it, too.

You're free to presume I'm a horribly uninvolved father. That would be completely untrue, however, since I was the awesome, feminist-approved, stay-at-home (work-from-home) dad for the last five years.

And I was absolutely sexy at it. Especially when one of the girls would stick a pink ribbon in my hair, and I went out in public without realizing I'd forgotten to remove it.

AST said...

Any statistics on frequencies of suicides in the two groups?

wv: misse

Shanna said...

Along with all the other bullshit in women's heads, even their vision of themselves is delusional.

Or maybe I have visions of my little brothers friends smashing caterpillers in front of me as a child and grinning with delight!

It's not all a war, Crack. Your link took me to this article, so I"m not sure what you were trying to say there.

Shanna said...

Ah, now it went to the right link, although one instance does not really prove anything. Whatever. Women suck. We are evil and want to crush all men. Men are perfect in every way.

I get it. Is it any better to do it from the male side than the women's side? It sucks either way. It's not a war.

Drew said...

Well now. This certainly went off the rails, didn't it?

Richard Fagin said...

"being good and supportive as daughters tend to be"

Who the hell's daughter is that referring to? My stepdaughter belongs in prison or a mental institution. Preferably prison. In Turkey.

My comment when the divorce is final, "Yes, it WAS your fault."

Dust Bunny Queen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dbp said...

"With a daughter at home, being good and supportive as daughters tend to be, a woman has less need for a husband."

I would like to see statistics on the percentage of women who have daughters and re-marry v. ones with sons who re-marry.

David said...

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Some women, a lot of women, just can't figure out how to get along with men/males. They can't stop being annoying and demanding 'girls'.

Hoooyeah! Such persons--and I knew one well--can pull off the dread double mammy: feeling superior while acting victimized.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

My take on it....why women with girls get more divorces than women with boys.

Some women, a lot of women, just can't figure out how to get along with men/males. They can't stop being annoying and demanding 'girls'.

Those women who get along with men and have less touchy, feeley, self centered, I have to find myself attitudes and just suck it up and deal with life, are more likely to stay married because the little shit that people men/boys and even other women do are not that important.

(reposted after fixing the estupido errors. I'm multi tasking. Making peach jam)

Brad said...

DBQ wrote:

Some women, a lot of women, just can't figure out how to get along with men/males. They can't stop being annoying and demanding 'girls'.

I agree with this. Within a year of my daughter deciding to get married (about 5 years earlier than her mother had "planned"), my ex bailed .... she dreaded being stuck "in a house full of boys" was one (of many) of her 'explanations'.

John Lynch said...

Why not look at it this way: sons make parents happier and less likely to divorce?

If we're spinning data, how come no one has said that yet?

Joe said...

How about the possibility that the original study is crap? Someone made up some shit and gullible writers ran with it.

Ralph L said...

unlike 50 years ago and a larger nuclear family, many mothers are harried by boyhood behavior.
Which has changed? Or have they fed off each other?
Ritalin and Valium for everyone.

c3 said...

I would have stopped at this:

Anita Kelly, a professor of psychology at Notre Dame, speculates ...

grandrants said...

There's something incredibly special about a father-daughter relationship. At least there is if you are a traditional daughter and had a traditional father. My dad and mom raised two girls and a boy, and never once did I hear either of them complain about drama, real or imagined from me or my sister.

I can't imagine having had better parents, and my father, well, if every kid--boy or girl--had a father like mine, this country would be a far, far better place.

Thanks, Dad.

The Crack Emcee said...

Shanna,

"I have visions of my little brothers friends smashing caterpillers in front of me as a child and grinning with delight!"

That's not the same thing as killing your own, or abandoning your loved ones, or those who've sacrificed for you. The fact you don't understand that - and use the killing of insects to condemn your brother's friends - speaks volumes.

"Women suck. We are evil and want to crush all men. Men are perfect in every way."

That's even more crazy fem talk. What you are is fault-finding imperfect beings yourself, who wouldn't appreciate another human being's sacrifice if it was accompanied by a billion I love you's daily (which my ex got) and all the money in the world.

Actually that's not true:

They'll do anything - absolutely fucking anything - for a dollar.

John Lynch said...

The paradox of experience: you are a fool not to learn from it, but you can't apply it to everyone.

HT said...

Speaking of offspring, I have a question. What would a fair monthly food budget be for a male college student living in off campus housing (ie an apartment) be? Let's just say in Madison as a for instance. I'm doing some budgeting.

DADvocate said...

Doesn't quite explain why my 14 year old daughter moved in with me 3 months ago and refuses to spend a single night with her psycho bitch mother.

My 17 year old son has lived with me full-time since we separated when he was 5 and will spend 1-2 nights a month with his mother. His mother tends to treat her sons better but still no where close to good. My oldest son is 21 and has lived on his own since graduating high school.

DADvocate said...

I would like to see statistics on the percentage of women who have daughters and re-marry v. ones with sons who re-marry.

Hah! My ex was going to re-marry but his husband to be had a conflict with my son, then 13 and already bigger than the guy. He had second thoughts after that and left.

John Lynch said...

HT-

Depends on whether he's going out to eat or not. A single man can live on very little. I can easily live on $25/week for food. If you want him to be able to eat out, or not have to cook everything, send more.

Also, there are dates and group outings and so on. That stuff is important, too.

HT said...

Thanks John. Initially I suggested $200 per month and he was pretty psyched about that, and then I thought, oh man, have I offered too much?!

Dust Bunny Queen said...

@HT

Depends on whether your son has any cooking skills. If he is going to eat out exclusively at fast food places it can be expensive sometimes. However, inexpensive fast food $1.00 hamburgers. Egg McMuffins (which I love but wouldn't want everyday) can be cheap but really unhealthy in the long run.

Top Ramen is the college student's best friend.

But off the cuff.... I would say $125 to $150. Not counting beer, of course :-D

On the topic of women/divorce/female children vs male children. I think the sickest thing I've seen is the woman who gets a divorce and then treats her daughter as a 'girlfriend' and confidant. Sucking her daughter into a crippled adult relationship where the child has no business being involved or need to be aware of the dynamics of a failed marriage.

These women have no idea how to deal with boys/men/males and are using their daughters as a crutch because inside, they are hollow sub adults themselves. Cruel cruel cruel.....not to mention selfish.

Again, my contention is that (generally) that women who have sons are more able to deal with male-female relationships in general, than those who have only daughters and use those daughters as mirrors of themselves.

DADvocate said...

there may be some women who divorce to protect a daughter from abuse.

Or so they say. Children with their natural father in the home are less likely to be abused than children without their natural father in the home. The rates of child abuse in Army families goes up when the father is deployed.

Mothers are almost twice as likely to be directly involved in child maltreatment as fathers.

Kirk Parker said...

DBQ,

"I think the sickest thing I've seen..."

Sick indeed, but maybe not quite as sick as when the dad is turning the daughter into his confidante...

HKatz said...

Mothers are almost twice as likely to be directly involved in child maltreatment as fathers.

Not a surprise, or at least it shouldn't be; as the article itself points out, you're going to see more incidents with the parent who's also around the kids most - and if the role (and burdens) of parenting isn't shared by a mother and father, but is taken over entirely or almost entirely by the mother you'll see more cases... (or there's the presence of a boyfriend/stepfather, who statistically are more likely to perpetrate abuse than the natural father).

lyssalovelyredhead said...

DBQ said: I think the sickest thing I've seen is the woman who gets a divorce and then treats her daughter as a 'girlfriend' and confidant. Sucking her daughter into a crippled adult relationship where the child has no business being involved or need to be aware of the dynamics of a failed marriage.

I agree that that is bad, but I've noticed that single women with sons (and sometimes even married women who aren't happy with their husbands who have sons) tend to turn them into surrogate husbands. They expect, and the son feels obligated to offer, a level of support and protection that a woman should be getting from a husband. Once a woman has her young teen son believing that she relies on him, rather than the other way around, there's no chance of establishing discipline, boundaries, or any meaningful use of the word "no."

MadisonMan said...

@HT -- I think the budget should also include where your son will be shopping. You *can* use the bus routes in Madison to get to food shop, but it's terribly inconvenient. If he has a car, then he can get to Woodmans' (East, not West, 'cause East has lower prices) to buy cheap staples, and then go to Sentry in Hilldale, which I find has the best produce.

If he has a way of getting out of downtown, I'd say $200/month would be generous. Maybe he should send you receipts for a couple weeks so you can see what kind of totals he's ringing up.

c3 said...

I find it interesting that a large conversation has ensued from a "fact" that may be no more than statistical variation and a "theory" (read "speculation") that apparently has no solid research behind it.

We don't need "truth" just give us a narrative and we'll run with it.

Triangle Man said...

@C3

I find it interesting that a large conversation has ensued from a "fact" that may be no more than statistical variation and a "theory"...

New to Internet discussions, are you?

Marshal said...

Rule one of social science: All racial analyses showing non-whites at a disadvantage are the result of discrimination.

Rule two: All racial analyses showing non-whites at an advantage result from natural ability or from cultural differences.

Rule three: All gender based statistical deviations will be interpreted as inherently positive to women and negative to men.

Here's your PHD, the rest are just details.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

I agree that that is bad, but I've noticed that single women with sons (and sometimes even married women who aren't happy with their husbands who have sons) tend to turn them into surrogate husbands

I agree. Both situations are bad.

This is why children need BOTH functional role models. Male and female. Functional as opposed to dysfunctional.

Unfortunately, we are mostly reflections of our early upbringing and role models. If you have dysfunctional and distorted family dynamics, that is how you will (unconsciously) raise your own children and the circle goes on.

c3 said...

Triangle;
New to Internet discussions, are you?

No, I've seen the Emperor's parade pass by many times.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

DBQ- yep!

Dust Bunny Queen said...

@lyssa

Yep. You read my underlying thoughts.

I certainly don't want to deny anyone their 'rights', but the reality is that we won't know the results of the experiment of raising children without the traditional and (I believe) biologically necessary role models for a generation or two. By then....it will be too late.

Similarly, the "good intentions" of creating a welfare program, has created a welfare lifestyle and destroyed the family structure of inner city blacks and others who know are permanent dependants of government largesse.

The results have been disastrous for the people and disastrous for society, and I doubt that the results can ever be reversed.

Sometimes the good of society and the continuation of future generations should trump feel good mythological rights.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Absolutely, DBQ. Which makes me wonder, though, what about gay couples parenting? My theory would be that they are still much better than a single parent, because at least the child gets good interaction with two different people, and because they are less likely to create the types of weird role-blurring that we have been discussing.

But, on the other hand, I still suspect that, even with biological considerations aside, two opposite sex parents are important to a child. The sexes are different, they have legitimate differences, and I don't think that we can deny the associated experiences of having both sexes as parents to a child and expect that to be just fine. (I'm well aware that there is research that disputes my suspicion here, but I don't trust it. 1) It's too soon in the grand experiment of these sorts of families to draw solid evidence, and 2) I suspect that most of the researchers really want a certain conclusion. Time will tell, I suppose.)

AlphaLiberal said...

"Women, good. Men, bad."

Yeah, I gotta say I get plenty of this thinking. See: The Great Girls Self Esteem Crisis (partially blamed on boys). Thing is, it's hard to be a teen, for all.

Boys, of course, never have a self-esteem crisis. If they do, tough shit, they deserve it.

And if men organize around same, we're evil.

Ceoshea said...

I am a mother of three daughters who unfortunately married and made children with a narcissistic jerk. My three girls have remained extremely close to me throughout the divorce process and have grown even further away from their father. Not what I wanted for them, but sometimes life works out that way.

veni vidi vici said...

"My experience have been that fathers dote on their daughters and mothers on their sons, while being quite sceptical of offspring of their own sex.

I have seen this as well."

Strictly anecdotally as well, in my experience, the children favor their opposite-sex parent during the younger years (at least) as much or moreso than their parents favor their opposite-sex children. Skepticism has nothing to do with it on that side of the relationship.