I remember when I was a very young dad, and 15 minutes with my very young son was torture. I see myself in much of what he tells. Much of it by imagining the now dad of a 10yo as a dad of 4 months old son.
But there's one thing I can tell for sure. A father can not replace a mother. I wouldn't take offense if a woman asked me why isn't my wife taking care of the child. In the past 10 years there were countless cases where my wife handled things entirely differently then myself. Specially the emotionally relevant things, which are extremely important at early stages of child development.
There is no gender equality when it comes to what a child needs. A child needs the smile of a mother as much as they need the smile of a father. And one can not replace the other.
>There is no gender equality when it comes to what a child needs. A child needs the smile of a mother as much as they need the smile of a father. And one can not replace the other.
There is such a heavy statement that I cannot begin to explain how wrong it is. Are you saying that a single parent cannot raise a child on her (or his) own? In the absence of any scientific evidence in your support, I'd say you are absolutely and terribly wrong. How can you say "a father cannot replace a mother"? I don't mind you not taking offense. I don't mind your assertion that your wife is a better parent than you are. However, it remains at best anecdotal. Your leap of faith from one example to a broad generalization that irreparably harms not only women but single fathers and same-sex couples in one broad swath is very disturbing. I hope you realize that.
I respect your personal experience but we cannot draw conclusions that can hurt a lot of people without backing evidence. I hear stories about how alcoholic mothers get custody of children over responsible dads. We do not have full support from the people in terms of same-sex marriage. In a situation like this, generalization like this probably does more damage than it is worth.
I wouldn't say the mother is happy. I'd imagine she'd be overworked unless she had some help (grandparents perhaps?). However, I'd not make any statement that might be seen as her not being capable of doing as good a job.
I believe it's fair to say the woman do a greater job than they would normally do. There're heros.
But doesn't mean that it's just as good. Given the circumstances, they do their best. The best of all being that they make it possible to their children to grow, at least, healthy enough to be aware and overcome the missing parts of their families.
Needless to say, there are many man+woman families that fuck up their kids. Needless to say.
Here is my take on what he was saying. If a child has a mother and father(or mom&mom/dad&dad, there are always going to be things that one parent is better capable of handling than the other. I saw his view to align with the phrase "it take a village to raise a child", meaning that kids have many and varying needs that are best fulfilled by a group of people that love them.
I think it's certainty true that a single parent can raise a child just as well as a multi parent household, but that doesn't mean that a child doesn't also benefit from love and care from others. I think the point is that whoever are the important adults in a child's life, each of them provide benefits that others aren't as well suited for. A mom isn't a drop in replacement for a dad, a grandmother isn't a replacement for an aunt, and the next door neighbor that might as well be a child's second mom isn't a replacement for the child's biological mother.
I think the point was that gender equality isn't at all important to a child or it's needs, so we should quit making it one at all.
> I think the point was that gender equality isn't at all important to a child or it's needs, so we should quit making it one at all.
It should definitely be a gender equality issue, too. Women are by many, or even most, viewed as an essential parent, while a father is a nice-to-have parent. This doesn't help in divorce proceedings, where at the worst a crack addicted mother might be more likely to get full custody then a responsible father. Needless to say, this ultimately harms children as well.
At its heart this isn't some luxury concern in the vain of dads should get paternity leave from their jobs (although that does sound like a worthy end-goal) - the main point is to combat gender stereotypes that keeps us from seeing the individual people and their personalities, which harms everybody involved.
> There is no gender equality when it comes to what a child needs. A child needs the smile of a mother as much as they need the smile of a father. And one can not replace the other.
Isn't this essentially the argument against gay adoption and gay parenting in general? Because studies show their kids aren't adversely affected by this.
Basically the whole conversation turned into a men's rights/anti-feminist/heterosexist maelstrom. Somewhere in here some guy defended the claim that china was a matriarchal society (in the sense of having few problems with sexism) and then turned around and complained that stay at home dads are discriminated against.
I guess it shouldn't be terribly surprising because our industry is uniquely filled with people that are both highly privileged and more . . . limited on the empathy front. But it is sad. Hopefully, fifty years from now this conversation will be an outlier rather than the standard occurrence.
I suppose you are referring to the parent comment to your comment (but maybe not). As always, the solution to such a problem is to upvote a better comment, or perhaps writing the better commment for the same comment level yourself.
>>In the past 10 years there were countless cases where my wife handled things entirely differently then myself. Specially the emotionally relevant things, which are extremely important at early stages of child development.
This is more about your own inability to properly handle those situations requiring emotional involvement than a commentary on what fathers in general can or cannot provide. You are, after all, only one person.
I respect your experiences and commend you for sharing them, but at the end of the day you are basing your opinions on (your own) anecdote and passing judgment on all the other fathers out there. This is unfair and sexist and you should not do it.
>>There is no gender equality when it comes to what a child needs. A child needs the smile of a mother as much as they need the smile of a father. And one can not replace the other.
This is stated as an absolute fact, not an opinion.
It sounds to be like you are confusing your personal failings with the traits of all men. Considering your history, it's not a real surprise. But do not continue to make the mistake that just because it's true for you, it's must be true for everyone.
So far, I have to disagree. While my wife handles some situations better than me, there are also scenarios, where I can shine. My son is 1.5 years, maybe it will change in the coming years.
I believe, mothers usually get a bonding advantage through breast-feeding. That did not work out in our case, so bottle-feeding it was and that can be done by men as well.
>> "There is no gender equality when it comes to what a child needs. A child needs the smile of a mother as much as they need the smile of a father. And one can not replace the other."
I kind of get what you mean but I don't think you've expressed it properly. I think the real important thing is that having multiple parental figures is a good thing. In some families the mother can provide better emotional support and the father brings things to the relationship the mother doesn't. If the parents are homosexual they can still both bring different things to the parent/child relationship which complement each other. Children of single parents often have Aunts/Uncles that care for them and are as much a part of their life as a parent.
Basically having multiple parental figures who's natural roles complement each other is best.
NB: I'm not a parent so I could be completely wrong.
I grew up with an absent father. I don't think a second mother would have replaced him. That's why I am skeptic about homosexual parents. At the price of my few karma points. :)
You explicitly said that a father could not replace a mother for sure, and now you are simply saying that the whole subject is "hotly debated"? If a child is worse off without having a mother or a father and does not get one of them, then such a suboptimal childhood (by your words) is definitely harmful, without having to resort to exotic interpretations of the word "harm".
You had no problem denouncing that this should have anything to with (gender) equality, but as soon as the focus naturally shifts to a more touchy subject (gay peoples right to raise children at all) you chicken out and resort to platitudes.
For sure means I am certain. May I? Is there anything social that is not debated?
I just learned today about a gay couple that adopted a child and used him for child-porn and pedophile sex. Would I bring that up as an argument? No. Have I? No. It's not.
People DO have different views on what harming a child means. It's not a platitude at all.
> May I? Is there anything social that is not debated?
What does this even mean? Gender equality and LGBT rights are debated, you chose to comment on the former and not on the latter.
> I just learned today about a gay couple that adopted a child and used him for child-porn and pedophile sex. Would I bring that up as an argument? No. Have I? No. It's not.
And so what? You've shown yourself to be above using specific incidents to condemn a whole group of people? If you have information that pertains to the claim that a child needs both a mother and a father, you can use that even if it does not include homosexual parents, since you can extrapolate from that information. After all, you said yourself that "I am certain", so this rock-hard belief is most likely backed by something other than your own experiences.
And if you don't have anything to back it up, just say so instead of just saying that "they exist, and are kind of hotly debated". I mean, what kind of answer or insight is that? It's just a platitude.
> People DO have different views on what harming a child means. It's not a platitude at all.
Oh come on, having a substandard childhood is definitely harmful compared to having a normal one. There's no need to conjure up images of violence or something traumatic when it comes to the word "harm". You were simply dodging the question.
Do you have an example of how she handled it differently? (Other than the emotional sitations.) I'm always curious of how others solve situations in a different (ie better) way than I could.
She was more empathic with our son. When he'd say he doesn't want to walk up the stairs be himself cause his feet hurt him, for instance. I'd tend to rationalize, and think that he's just pretending to be carried by one of us.
But really, the non-emotional situations don't matter that much. They are essential for the parent-child bound and their emotional development. Self-confidence and ability the empathize later in life will crucially depend on how these cases are handled.
That says nothing about fathers and everything about you. I'm empathetic to a fault and I wouldn't be at all surprised if I were the parent that did better in these emotional situations.
edit: I forgot to explicitly state that I am a male, just in case that wasn't obvious.
I'm always surprised at how much more patient my wife is with our son than I am. She will constantly engage with him and play with him for much longer than I am able to.
But there's one thing I can tell for sure. A father can not replace a mother. I wouldn't take offense if a woman asked me why isn't my wife taking care of the child. In the past 10 years there were countless cases where my wife handled things entirely differently then myself. Specially the emotionally relevant things, which are extremely important at early stages of child development.
There is no gender equality when it comes to what a child needs. A child needs the smile of a mother as much as they need the smile of a father. And one can not replace the other.