Time Magazine - Boys raised by nannies become adulterers

[CarrieT]

Interesting story:

 

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1975371,00.html?hpt=C2

[threebyfate]

So, what was my ex-husband's excuse, considering he was raised by his mother?

 

If you consider Friedman's focus, which is the Royals, it's more likely the boys in the family were more influenced by their fathers' non-monogamous behaviour.

 

Male cheating has been at a pretty steady rate over the years. It includes men with options, men without options, men raised by SAHMs and men raised by nannies.

 

But, this is the perfect forum for OWs and BWs to ask their MMs.

[norajane]

What if the nanny was male?

 

Such a crock. This sounds like a way to reduce adult men to infants without the ability to think, reason, and make choices. Or a way to avoid taking responsibility for their own choices and actions.

[bentnotbroken]

I guess all the cheaters I know were underprivileged cheaters:laugh: They could only afford to be raised by their mothers.

[Fallen Angel]

Okay, I read the article. But I think this one is much more interesting http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1907542,00.html

 

If the "nanny" theory were true, then in order to not raise an adulterer, not only would a woman have to forgo returning to work, but she would need to lock herself into a room alone with the child for the first year. Not only should she avoid allowing the child connection with a nanny, but with any other woman, or man for that matter, as the theory states that it is "having his needs met" by a nanny that causes the ability to split his affection/attachement. By the same token would not having siblings, aunts and uncles, and even their father care for the child also cause the split affection?

 

I think this theory is a bit too far out in left field. In many cultures they take the "it takes a village to raise a child" saying literally, and many women will be involved in the day to day care of a child. In those cultures I do not believe that infedelity is any more or less prevelent than in societies where families are "islands" unto themselves. I would venture a guess that if a child is raised with numerous women who care for his needs and love him, he will develop a deeper respect for all women, which would to my mind, lead to less chance of infedelity later in life.

[jj33]

Well that would fit my case, xMM was raised by nannies and sent to boarding school in another country where there were yet OTHER women who were available on a limited basis to meet his needs for a female figure in his life.

 

But I am not sure that works. In the US until the 70s most women didnt work. The idea that families have nannies on a larger scale (other than wealthy families) is a relatively new phenomenon as women have earned more in the work force.

 

That would suggest that the younger generation of men is more likely to cheat. That doesnt explain the many men in their 40s-60s who were raised by a stay at home Mom and cheat.

[NoIDidn't]

Not that I agree with the article, I haven't even read it, but it almost makes sense. Its an attachment thing. Being raised by nannies suggests a poor attachment to mom, and the parents in general.

 

People with poor attachments to major figures in their lives have a whole host of dysfunctional behaviors.

[fooled once]

Gah. I guess there isn't anything such as personal responsibility anymore.

 

 

I completely agree. Let's give another excuse for men who cheat.

[NoIDidn't]

Gah. I guess there isn't anything such as personal responsibility anymore.

 

I completely agree. Let's give another excuse for men who cheat.

 

Ah, c'mon guys! :laugh:They gotta blame somebody for their choices. And the long gone nanny is just as good as anyone else!

[sally4sara]

If the "nanny" theory were true, then in order to not raise an adulterer, not only would a woman have to forgo returning to work, but she would need to lock herself into a room alone with the child for the first year. Not only should she avoid allowing the child connection with a nanny, but with any other woman, or man for that matter, as the theory states that it is "having his needs met" by a nanny that causes the ability to split his affection/attachement. By the same token would not having siblings, aunts and uncles, and even their father care for the child also cause the split affection?

 

I would have to agree with you. I feel the study had an agenda that skewed any factual conclusions.

Wouldn't having your only model for relationships based around having one person at your beck and call 24/7 cause a self serving view of what a woman should be in a relationship?

I think, be it a hands on mothering situation or a nanny raised situation, much of what shapes a person is the values given as instruction through childhood and what they witness taking place in the parental relationship dynamic.

Then add to the mix single poor and single parent households where the relationship dynamic might be sporadic or the mother has to work two or three jobs and not always around for their needs or present with a relationship model for the child to witness at all. What then?

Too many factors to really make a call on this one.

[Fallen Angel]

And if I get fat from eating this Ben and Jerry's, it's my momma's fault cause she fed me fake mac n cheese. Or she didn't breastfeed me. That's it! I'll just finish this carton off...

 

OHHHHHHHHHHH.. that reminds me, i have some lovely choco-vanilla swirl with brownie bits and choco-chip cookie dough drops in the freezer.... (can I sue my mom for the weight gain? I mean, if I can sue McD's for their coffee being too hot, and I can be sued because my lover chooses to "allienate" his own affection from his wife *I did not persue him, he persued me for a very long time remember?* then by God, I should be able to sue my momma for going to work 12 hrs a day to pay the bills instead of staying at home and wiping my a$$ til I was ten, which makes me want to eat ice cream, damnit!! *sobs*)

[fooled once]

OHHHHHHHHHHH.. that reminds me, i have some lovely choco-vanilla swirl with brownie bits and choco-chip cookie dough drops in the freezer.... (can I sue my mom for the weight gain? I mean, if I can sue McD's for their coffee being too hot, and I can be sued because my lover chooses to "allienate" his own affection from his wife *I did not persue him, he persued me for a very long time remember?* then by God, I should be able to sue my momma for going to work 12 hrs a day to pay the bills instead of staying at home and wiping my a$$ til I was ten, which makes me want to eat ice cream, damnit!! *sobs*)

 

But FA, did she breastfeed you until you were 8?

 

 

I totally agree with thoughts -- it is ridiculous the lengths people will go to to blame someone else for their actions.

[OWoman]

I don't know where the original research was conducted, but this clearly was not a cross-cultural study. In my home country, those cultures that might employ nannies have the lowest incidence of extra-marital dalliances.