Radu Posted May 6, 2012 Posted May 6, 2012 Personality Disorders are many times formed into that person by the environment. They run through a family because of the family's abnormality, and not because of a problem of 'square pegs in round holes'. It's very important to look at the family of the girl you plan to marry [as a man but the opposite works too].
Radu Posted May 6, 2012 Posted May 6, 2012 I think it's an ideal solution, especially for all the career women who seemingly can't find a "marry up" option or they want the career and a family. Unfortunately, I still think many women still are bred to think a "real man" is one who makes as much or more than her, and thus is the dominant income in the household. I think many women would feel embarrassed to tell colleagues their husband is being Mr Mom and she's out bringing home the bacon. I even wonder if the woman would not see her man as attractive or masculine anymore. Both sides in my book need to let go of the past and be willing and accepting of trading classic gender roles. Do women respect stay at home dads? Mamamia It's a well known fact that women can't love a man they don't respect [not for long anyway], so that article could be better interpreted as 'Can women love stay at home dads ?'. I think they can, provided they update their definition of masculinity with the addendum that it is not to bring home the check/bacon, but it can be. Weather or not the modern woman can make this distinction and end up happy is interesting to see ... women cannot sweep this under the rug anymore, feminism was linked to this and it was bound to appear.
soserious1 Posted May 6, 2012 Posted May 6, 2012 House husbands? Been there, done that and all I got to show for it was a lifelong alimony obligation. You don't want to have a job? Your choice dear, have fun camping in the yard & you better find a way to get your own electricity & water because if you try to use mine, I'll be calling the police
zengirl Posted May 7, 2012 Posted May 7, 2012 If more parents DID mold their clay instead of chasing the mighty dollar or next affair, maybe kids would be better these days. I've seen many a kid with good, active parents turn to gangs and drugs, and I've seen kids without good, active parents who come from the same at-risk neighborhoods utilize the positive role models they do have to realize they wanted something else for their lives. So, you're just wrong. Very, very wrong. Certainly, active parents help. Lots of things help, statistically, but nothing is a guarantee. At any way, your version of parenting is not one that generally works. Trying to "mold" someone may work, for a short while, when the child is very, very young and has no outside influences, especially if you are effective at using guilt and shame and other negative emotions. Generally, this backfires later in life, because you haven't taken the time to build the child's positive self-esteem and independence, and so that independence will be taken later, through force, and generally rebellious actions. It's easy to tell which children have been "molded" and which haven't. I'm not talking strict, I'm talking right and wrong. Big difference. But the PC world tells you right and wrong are mythology now days. That's bull. Right and wrong are not myths, but nor are they simple. I'm all for teaching children character, but if you think parents have absolute control in that, you're dreaming. Generally, the best parents (and other role models) can do is model and guide, not mold. You need to take a softer hand and ignore your ego to get the best results, generally. I see a lot of ego in your ideas about child-rearing. One big reason I am not married with kids is BECAUSE proper parenting is nearly illegal now. If I'm not allowed to teach my kids right and wrong, I won't have any. As MC said, the concept of parenting is very new, really. Nearly illegal? Hardly. We have more resources for parents and research on modes of parenting than ever before, so parents can better understand and help guide their individual children. I also don't think kids are really any better or worse than they ever were, and most kids are pretty good. ALL kids test boundaries. That's what they do, and it's essential they do it. That's the time for people to test boundaries and begin to understand the world. While guiding, you ARE molding, especially at the very earliest ages when you have the most influence. Now, tell me I'm wrong in THAT. At the earliest ages, you're doing very little in terms of moral underpinnings, which seems to be what you think molding is. Any child at the sensorimotor or preoperational developmental stage doesn't have the proper cognitive tools to really understand right or wrong to a firm degree --- that's not to say they cannot follow rules or boundaries or have empathy or kindness etc. It is to say you're working backwards if you're starting with that. What you should be doing at that age is building a sense of self-esteem and security, begin socializing them with other children, working on developmental skills, and providing a good model. Trying to control someone and "mold" them is not, IMO, providing a good model because you're showing a model of a controlling nature. That will bite you in the butt later.
Mme. Chaucer Posted May 7, 2012 Posted May 7, 2012 One big reason I am not married with kids is BECAUSE proper parenting is nearly illegal now. If I'm not allowed to teach my kids right and wrong, I won't have any. Huh? Are you upset that beating children is no longer accepted by society? Violent corporal punishment is the only "traditional" aspect of parenting that I can think of that is illegal. Besides sending your "clay" to work in factories to bring home some bacon for the fam. You'd like to bring back those halcyon days? Cool. With all my arguing and even outrage at some of the comments on this thread, I would like to point out that I believe it's crucial for people to bring the best they have to offer to the role of "parent." If they can't or won't, maybe they should not have any kids. And I see very many people who are having children who (IMO) would have been better off "raising" themselves, first. I myself had a LOT to learn when I found out I was pregnant (accidentally, and after being told by doctors that I would be unable to bear children) and had my daughter. Fortunately I was teachable. And I made a LOT of mistakes. If life offered "do-overs," there are several different choices I would have made with regards to how I raised my daughter. Though parenting is a very important, heartbreaking, challenging, serious, etc. undertaking, the notion of approaching this role from such an ignorant and ego-driven place as "I am going to mold MY clay into what I want it to be, and my children will be perfect! Unlike yours! But I don't have any and never will!" is appalling to me. A person coming at raising children from that place either better have a big epiphany before it's too late - or be likely to create disaster.
Recommended Posts