Feminism and real men.

[joystickd]

Momma likely wasn't wrong just that guys heard what they wanted to hear. Guys generally want a nice gal and they don't seem to think saying they 'I want a nice gal' equates to 'be nice and I'll be attracted to her'.

Yet often when guys hear 'I want a nice guy' they equate it to 'be nice and I'll be attracted to you'.

 

It's likely not clear to many gals that when they say 'I want a nice guy' she should include 'I don't want a pushover' as many don't define being nice as being a pushover.

 

Having a different definition of nice than guys is gals trying to confuse guys with ambiguity rather than different definitions.

 

Not responding to guy's definition of nice in the way the guy wants is gals trying to evade accountability.

 

Stating it's misintrepretation and different definitions is say it's all the guy's fault.

A shining example of not accepting accountability. I see you got a tag team partner so time to tag out lol

[joystickd]

Mom wrong and I will stand by that and I know most men will agree with me. There is no need to convince me otherwise. I do my thing out here and what I am doing is working and I plan to pass that knowledge on at some point and have a whole group of real men that check the BS women bring and will realize what I realized that in the realm of dating and attraction mom was wrong.

[udolipixie]

A shining example of not accepting accountability. I see you got a tag team partner so time to tag out lol

What am I not accepting accountability for that from your experiences guy generally think being nice means being a pushover? If so that I have to accept accountability for others definition.

 

Or am I not accepting accountability that gals don't respond to a guy's definition of nice aka pushover? If so that I have to accept accountability for a guy being unattractive to a gal because of he's using a different definition than hers.

 

Perhaps that some guys equate 'I want a nice guy' to 'be nice and I'll be attracted to you'? If so since guys don't often equate saying 'I want a nice gal' to 'be nice and I'll be attracted to you'.

[joystickd]

What am I not accepting accountability for that from your experiences guy generally think being nice means being a pushover? If so that I have to accept accountability for others definition.

 

Or am I not accepting accountability that gals don't respond to a guy's definition of nice aka pushover? If so that I have to accept accountability for a guy being unattractive to a gal because of he's using a different definition than hers.

 

Perhaps that some guys equate 'I want a nice guy' to 'be nice and I'll be attracted to you'? If so since guys don't often equate saying 'I want a nice gal' to 'be nice and I'll be attracted to you'.

Meaning you are not clearcut and honest about what you desire. Oh! That means being accountable for your actions and not other. I am so tired of talking to dumb people

[udolipixie]

Meaning you are not clearcut and honest about what you desire. Oh! That means being accountable for your actions and not other. I am so tired of talking to dumb people

 

So you know what I do and say dating and attraction wise to state I'm a shining example example of not accepting accountability meaning you are not clearcut and honest about what you desire.

 

It's not being dumb to think you meant accountable for others actions as the not accepting accountability was in response to my post about others actions:

Momma likely wasn't wrong just that guys heard what they wanted to hear. Guys generally want a nice gal and they don't seem to think saying they 'I want a nice gal' equates to 'be nice and I'll be attracted to her'.

Yet often when guys hear 'I want a nice guy' they equate it to 'be nice and I'll be attracted to you'.

 

It's likely not clear to many gals that when they say 'I want a nice guy' she should include 'I don't want a pushover' as many don't define being nice as being a pushover.

 

Having a different definition of nice than guys is gals trying to confuse guys with ambiguity rather than different definitions.

 

Not responding to guy's definition of nice in the way the guy wants is gals trying to evade accountability.

 

Stating it's misintrepretation and different definitions is say it's all the guy's fault.

A shining example of not accepting accountability. I see you got a tag team partner so time to tag out lol

[joystickd]

What qualification do you women have to teach men to be men?

Can a peahen tell a peacock about their plumage?

Can a female deer tell male deer how to effectively grow antlers so they can have a mate?

[udolipixie]

What qualification do you women have to teach men to be men?

Can a peahen tell a peacock about their plumage?

Can a female deer tell male deer how to effectively grow antlers so they can have a mate?

Interesting question as by your logic fathers didn't need qualifications as they were needed and seemingly the only ones who can teach a gal to recognize her value as a woman.

 

Where/when did anyone state that gals would teach guys how to be men? From my recollection the discussion of how guys learn to be men were:

#1 The father teaches him how to be a man

#2 Male figures in his life such as grandfathers, uncles, and male cousins teach him how to be a man

#3 He can decide what kind of person he wants to be then decide what kind of man he wants to be from those he admires most, what kind of relationship dynamic he wants, and what kind of partner he wants to be. That's learning and teaching yourself on a hourney to self-discovery and it'll most likely be coming from male influences aka mixing up what they learned from other guys and emulating a mix of other guys.

 

I was merely making note of the irrational and illogical points in your argument. I wasn't trying to convince you of anything just making note of logical fallacies. Convincing someone seemed to be your bit along with throwing out ad hominems when it didn't happen. You realized based on your and others like you experiences that in the realm of dating and attraction mom was wrong. No different that a gal realizing men are useless, pigs, or daogs based on her and others like her experiences in life, dating, and attraction.

Edited May 27, 2012 by udolipixie

[joystickd]

Interesting question as by your logic fathers didn't need qualifications as they were needed and seemingly the only ones who can teach a gal to recognize her value as a woman.

 

Where/when did anyone state that gals would teach guys how to be men? From my recollection the discussion of how guys learn to be men were:

#1 The father teaches him how to be a man

#2 Male figures in his life such as grandfathers, uncles, and male cousins teach him how to be a man

#3 He can decide what kind of person he wants to be then decide what kind of man he wants to be from those he admires most, what kind of relationship dynamic he wants, and what kind of partner he wants to be. That's learning and teaching yourself on a hourney to self-discovery and it'll most likely be coming from male influences aka mixing up what they learned from other guys and emulating a mix of other guys.

 

I was merely making note of the irrational and illogical points in your argument. I wasn't trying to convince you of anything just making note of logical fallacies. Convincing someone seemed to be your bit along with throwing out ad hominems when it didn't happen. You realized based on your and others like you experiences that in the realm of dating and attraction mom was wrong. No different that a gal realizing men are useless, pigs, or daogs based on her and others like her experiences in life, dating, and attraction.

What I am saying isn't illogical. if you are going to attempt to sound like an intellectual at least use a spell check damn

[joystickd]

All I got to say is whatever. You illogical women can do whatever the hell you want. When you all complain about no real men just remember you are one of the contributions to it. The day will come when your sons will realize that what you told them about woman was BS and the true success will come from getting mentored by a man hell in the extreme case a man that is a pimp. The modern woman not all but the fringes of modern women want to control the dynamic of man woman interaction thinking its power. I got news it ain't sh*t. Men fight for because they don't want to be your sucker because they know deep down if they become your sucker and you have them by the balls they lose. Its that simple. No woman wants a man like that and women are not going to tell sons and other males that because it takes away from their power. I look at this forum and there are women on here that could never in a million years handle a real man its because they dealt with boys too much. Its just like a man messing with sluts he can't handle a real woman because he has got spoiled by having it handed to him and its the same with women.

I learned the game well from my father to become good but I learned from masters to make me great. I leave you with this.

[udolipixie]

What I am saying isn't illogical. if you are going to attempt to sound like an intellectual at least use a spell check damn

 

You've stated plenty of illogical things in this thread the most recent one being I'm a shining example of not accepting accountability meaning I'm not clearcut and honest about what I desire when you don't know what I do and say dating and attraction wise. Though if you've been stalking me to know those details that's a dishonest rather than illogical statement.

 

Nice evasion tactics: switch topics, ad hominems, argue based on your interpretation rather than what was stated as you don't give a f*ck, and attack spelling rather than what was said. Though this is only your second time attacking spelling rather than the argument. :ast time I made 3 errors and this time I made 2 errors- hourney (journey) and doags (dogs):

Interesting question as by your logic fathers didn't need qualifications as they were needed and seemingly the only ones who can teach a gal to recognize her value as a woman.

 

Where/when did anyone state that gals would teach guys how to be men? From my recollection the discussion of how guys learn to be men were:

#1 The father teaches him how to be a man

#2 Male figures in his life such as grandfathers, uncles, and male cousins teach him how to be a man

#3 He can decide what kind of person he wants to be then decide what kind of man he wants to be from those he admires most, what kind of relationship dynamic he wants, and what kind of partner he wants to be. That's learning and teaching yourself on a hourney to self-discovery and it'll most likely be coming from male influences aka mixing up what they learned from other guys and emulating a mix of other guys.

 

I was merely making note of the irrational and illogical points in your argument. I wasn't trying to convince you of anything just making note of logical fallacies. Convincing someone seemed to be your bit along with throwing out ad hominems when it didn't happen. You realized based on your and others like you experiences that in the realm of dating and attraction mom was wrong. No different that a gal realizing men are useless, pigs, or daogs based on her and others like her experiences in life, dating, and attraction.

[joystickd]

What is a daog? Do you actually know English? Nevermind you are not even worth it anymore. You so focused on being right you can't open your mind to concepts or even comprehend them which explains the need to recap them.

50 Cent P.I.M.P Dirty - YouTube Later loser.

[udolipixie]

All I got to say is whatever. You illogical women can do whatever the hell you want. When you all complain about no real men just remember you are one of the contributions to it. The day will come when your sons will realize that what you told them about woman was BS and the true success will come from getting mentored by a man hell in the extreme case a man that is a pimp. The modern woman not all but the fringes of modern women want to control the dynamic of man woman interaction thinking its power. I got news it ain't sh*t. Men fight for because they don't want to be your sucker because they know deep down if they become your sucker and you have them by the balls they lose. Its that simple. No woman wants a man like that and women are not going to tell sons and other males that because it takes away from their power. I look at this forum and there are women on here that could never in a million years handle a real man its because they dealt with boys too much. Its just like a man messing with sluts he can't handle a real woman because he has got spoiled by having it handed to him and its the same with women.

I learned the game well from my father to become good but I learned from masters to make me great. I leave you with this.

 

It's illogical to say that stating the rule is guys with single mothers have no man to teach him how to be a man is overlooking other male figures in his life such as grandfathers, uncles, male cousins, and male role models.

 

It's logical to state someone doesn't accept accountability and isn't clearcut and honest about what they desire. (Apparently one doesn't even need to know about the person's dating habits)

 

It's illogical to say that stating the rule is guys who are fathers know how to teach their sons to be a man is overlooking the possibility that the dad may not be a competent teacher.

 

It's logical to say that a gal should be thanking men for instilling healthy values in the women that eventually became feminist. As if it wasn't for fathers there would be no feminists and those women wouldn't have recognized their value as a woman in the context of man and woman relations. (Apparently it's not thanking feminism, feminists, and the encouragers it's men)

 

Interesting to see the agenda from which your illogical and irrational statements and your logic such as the above came from.

Edited May 27, 2012 by udolipixie

[udolipixie]

What is a daog? Do you actually know English? Nevermind you are not even worth it anymore. You so focused on being right you can't open your mind to concepts or even comprehend them which explains the need to recap them.

50 Cent P.I.M.P Dirty - YouTube Later loser.

 

I already explained 'daog' was a typo for 'dogs' seems you should take your advice of reading so you'll respond coherently.

 

Later guy who can't discuss without switching topics, insults, attacking spelling rather than the argument, and arguing based on his interpretations and when told so says he doesn't give a f*ck. I'm not focused on being right that's seems to be you with touting how most will agree with you and how you're right I'm dumb and I don't understand.

[joystickd]

I already explained 'daog' was a typo for 'dogs' seems you should take your advice of reading so you'll respond coherently.

 

Later guy who can't discuss without switching topics, insults, attacking spelling rather than the argument, and arguing based on his interpretations and when told so says he doesn't give a f*ck. I'm not focused on being right that's seems to be you with touting how most will agree with you and how you're right I'm dumb and I don't understand.

hell if you can't spell don't be mad with me. I say whatever the hell I want if you don't like fine ignore me. I will speak my mind. I will call you whatever I want. Honestly all you could say is I'm illogical and spew studies with no sources and won't say them because you want to mess with Dasein. Oh I bet you have have a crush on Dasein. I feel the love or is it lust. Later loser

[udolipixie]

hell if you can't spell don't be mad with me. I say whatever the hell I want if you don't like fine ignore me. I will speak my mind. I will call you whatever I want. Honestly all you could say is I'm illogical and spew studies with no sources and won't say them because you want to mess with Dasein. Oh I bet you have have a crush on Dasein. I feel the love or is it lust. Later loser

I'm amused by you as to me it's absolutely amusing that you point out I made spelling errors, I note that I made two, and you question me on one of them when I already explained it just to insult me.

 

I couldn't care less what you say or call me I'm just stating it's telling how it seems when you can't discuss something, argue something or make a logical point you resort to switching topics, insults, or attacking spelling.

 

I say you're illogical because you've repeatedly made irrational and illogical statements. Such as stating I'm a shining example of not accepting accountability meaning I'm not clearcut and honest about what I desire. You don't know what I do or say dating and attraction wise though if you were stalking me it'd be a dishonest rather than illogical statement.

 

I haven't spewed studies with no sources as I cited the sources just not to you.

 

No crush on or lust of dasein as I don't crush on people nor do I lust for people I haven't seen physically. I just like poking fun at him as I find him hypocritical often doing what he claims feminists and others do.

 

Laters guy who perhaps has a crush on or lust for dasein as he seemed to bring up that bit out of nowhere (projection?).

Edited May 27, 2012 by udolipixie

[Els]

What qualification do you women have to teach men to be men?

Can a peahen tell a peacock about their plumage?

Can a female deer tell male deer how to effectively grow antlers so they can have a mate?

 

Really, have you never met a woman who made you think, "Geez, she acts more like a man than a woman"? Same deal. Everyone has their own perceptions of how the opposite sex 'should' behave.

 

This entire topic is just made of fail flamebait though. I really wonder how it's been left up for so long. Lack of reports? I'll go make one just in case...

[Taramere]

Really though, I gained a lot of advice about growth from my peers rather than male role models. In fact, I often turned to my YOUNGER brothers for advice at times. They were more active, outgoing and more masculine than I was, so they had more exciting lives.

 

I never discuss relationships with my dad.

 

I haven't encountered many people who do, when in their teens or early twenties, discuss their relationships with their parents. Mainly on account of parents not being considered particularly cool.

 

I suppose what you learn from watching your own parents, growing up, is what values seem to work and what aspects of their relationship you would find hard to tolerate.

 

It must be the hardest thing for anybody to decide very objectively what is best for a child...and to leave their own needs and interests out of that. I tend to agree with the general rule that two parents, one of each gender, who work well as a team is optimal because it gives the child a healthy model of men and women working together...however, if one of those parents is a narcissist who's more concerned with their image (being macho, sexy, top dog or whatever else) than they are with the parenting role, then it's possible that their participation in the parenting process will do more harm than good.

 

When I read a thread like this where there's a lot of anger being thrown out my immediate thought is "how effective could this particular person ever be in a male/female team? What kind of example would they set for a child, if the way they conduct themselves on here is typical of the way they carry on in real life?" BTW ThaWholigan, I'm not saying this in reference to anything you've written (just wanted to get that out there, because I think your posts are very reasoned and introspective).

 

On this thread, this post caught my eye.

 

the first time 20 years ago when I saw a wussy guy driving next to me in rush hour traffic in his lame-ass minivan with the baby seats in the back - and he was dressed for work in a white shirt and tie - I knew it was over for most men. It wouldn't have surprised me in the LEAST if the guy had some Disney movie soundtrack playing in his casette deck. Jesus.

 

There's just NOTHING manly about that.

 

When I was a pre-teen, ever Friday my dad - for all his sins (poor anger management etc) would pick up a couple of my girls' magazines up from the shop next to his practice. Whether a person's a mother or a father, they start doing these uncool things. The parent role kicks in, they'll maybe have baby seats in their cars, talk about changing nappies, sit on parent/teacher boards, leave the pub early because they want to have a family dinner, watch Disney films with their kids etc. It's not feminism that leads a man to do all these things. It's parenthood and love of his kids.

 

A post like the one I've quoted above could do with being addressed on a thread like this that seems to be concerned primarily with men being allowed to be men by playing an active role in raising the next generation.

 

Anybody, male or female, who has spent any time with kids in a caring role knows that there are various parts you have to play. Disciplinarian to maintain boundaries, buffoon to promote play, nurturer to help the child feel safe...I should stress that I'm not a parent, but I spent most of my twenties looking after other people's kids and am a very active aunt to my niece and nephew.

 

I usually had male shift partners in that "looking after children" role in my twenties. They, just like me, had to be ready to take on a variety of roles in order to do the job effectively. To put their egos to one side in order to do it well...and to ensure that the children's needs (rather than their own) were getting priority.

 

The ones who were really good at the job were in the role because they wanted to be and because they cared about the welfare of the young people in their care. Of course they would do more traditionally manly stuff like play football with the boys....but there were other elements of the job they had to do that were more concerned with creating a warm, safe feeling and child-friendly environment with good boundaries in place.

 

To somebody like Mr "Ugh no real man has a babyseat in the back of his car" a man like that is a "pussy". To me, a man like that is a good, caring father. Somebod who's left behind the narcissism of adolescence, and concerns about his image, in order to give priority to his role as father.

 

There are elements to being a very good Dad that probably do make a man look somewhat pussified and soft in the eyes of less mature men who don't yet have what it takes to be a good father....but it's not feminism that makes a man a less macho and more nurturing personality. It's love for his family.

 

It's odd to me that on a thread that's so concerned with preservation of the father role, mockery of a man fulfilling the father role in a very evident way went unaddressed.

Edited May 27, 2012 by Taramere

[Woggle]

The person who made that post about the car seat is a woman. I don't know too many men who would question a man's manhood because he takes an active role in parenting. In fact I see more women who just don't see their men as attractive anymore because they take on that role.

[Taramere]

The person who made that post about the car seat is a woman. I don't know too many men who would question a man's manhood because he takes an active role in parenting. In fact I see more women who just don't see their men as attractive anymore because they take on that role.

 

I had no idea. I hadn't seen that poster's "work" before...but taking a quick look at posting history, I see you're right.

 

Still not sure why, in a thread where lots of challenges are being made on other people's opinions, and where the male role in parenting is being discussed, a comment like that would go unaddressed.

 

To me, there's nothing more attractive than a man who can combine being a man with having that nurturing element to him. It's something I associate particularly with men on the Continent. I can remember as a kid, if we went to other parts of Europe on holiday, Continental men always seemed to be very warm and affectionate in their manner. There are just some countries where people are very child friendly, and I think they're probably healthier cultures generally.

 

I would say that a man who has a lot of warmth about him, is good with children and has no worries about carrying child-related paraphernalia about with him, is more manly than some cold, narcissistic stick of a creature who thinks children are the spawn of satan. I'm reminded of men who run outdoor adventure stuff (generally the kind of men I get along best with). Being good with children is often a big part of that sort of work...and I can't see anything remotely unmanly about that.

[dasein]

Households without fathers are worse for children generally, all the back and forth BS generalities in the thread notwithstanding:

 

Statistics on Father Absence : National Fatherhood Initaitive

 

@joystickd, the reason you are getting such chattering flak is that the above type of stats are anathema to doctrinaire feminism, which has held the destruction of the traditional family unit as one of its chief aims (and lately one of its chief successes) for 40 years. Families without fathers simply can't be worse off than enlightened "govfamilies" where the mother and government raise the children. Oh no, that would mean 1) that men serve an important function in childrearing, 2) women aren't perfect parents all by themselves, and we can't have that because it stands counter to patriarchal terrorism theory, which dictates that the traditional family is a hotbed of patriarchal oppression, perversion and abuse. In other words, claiming fathers are important and beneficial in the home messes with the victimization that feminism uses to steal resources and enact discrimination politically.

 

They all believe this (though won't admit it), other than the "fem-lites" who don't really understand what feminism is other than "free goodies for women," which is why none have bothered to repudiate without qualifiers the misandric, unsubstantiated "evil rape man" hate speech u-pixie posted earlier and refused to document over and over. BTW, she refuses to document it not to mess with me, but because she knows that posting the source of "those several studies" would make her look foolish, as no reputable study anywhere has ever claimed anything of the sort about men being mostly closet rapists. Her sources are feminist hate speech from various misandric propaganda sources, not any kind of legitimate research.

 

Note one poster's comment about trying to censor the thread. That is very telling. Do you go rushing to bang the report button whenever someone posts a thread you don't like? I don't (they do). I did report one thread as off topic recently, but unlike elswyth, didn't make any claim about whether such a thread should be "left up" on LS. Think about that. There are many posters here who would gladly shut down any negative commentary on feminism, the type who go to public meetings to shout down anyone who expresses a disagreeable opinion. So glad they can't do that here, and it drives them crazy. Neener neener.

[udolipixie]

the misandric, unsubstantiated "evil rape man" hate speech u-pixie posted earlier and refused to document over and over. BTW, she refuses to document it not to mess with me, but because she knows that posting the source of "those several studies" would make her look foolish, as no reputable study anywhere has ever claimed anything of the sort about men being mostly closet rapists. Her sources are feminist hate speech from various misandric propaganda sources, not any kind of legitimate research.

I refuse to publicly cite sources just to mess with you and certain people. I privately cited sources for others sending private messages.

 

Still on it being misandric hate speech but no outcry of talk of racism for the turnaround involving black guys.

 

Stating studies show something isn't hate speech to me. It's hate speech if I endorsed it, believed it, or argued it was applicable as a definitive statement, general truth or fact depending on whether the studies results stated or implied a negative trait inherent and exclusive to a group.

 

I posted a turnaround to show a user having similiar experiences doesn't mean when someone makes a definitive statement or rule they're not completely wrong. Interesting that my turnaround is misandric 'evil rape man' hate speech when I'm implying that what the studies state aren't a definitive statement about guys or the rule.

Listen, I was raised by a single mother and I am hopeless with women. Coincidence? Maybe, but he's not completely wrong

Many studies have consistently shown that the majority of guys will rape if there's no consequences so I suppose it maybe a coincidence it's not completely wrong that the majority of guys will rape given the opportunity.

 

I know many gals who dated black guys and encountered far more sexism than other races so I suppose it maybe a coincidence but they're not completely wrong that black guys are the most sexist race.

Edited May 28, 2012 by udolipixie

[udolipixie]

@joystickd, the reason you are getting such chattering flak is that the above type of stats are anathema to doctrinaire feminism, which has held the destruction of the traditional family unit as one of its chief aims (and lately one of its chief successes) for 40 years. Families without fathers simply can't be worse off than enlightened "govfamilies" where the mother and government raise the children. Oh no, that would mean 1) that men serve an important function in childrearing, 2) women aren't perfect parents all by themselves, and we can't have that because it stands counter to patriarchal terrorism theory, which dictates that the traditional family is a hotbed of patriarchal oppression, perversion and abuse. In other words, claiming fathers are important and beneficial in the home messes with the victimization that feminism uses to steal resources and enact discrimination politically.

Nice spiel you got from a discussion that stating it's a rule that guys with single mothers have no one to teach them how to be a man overlooks other likely male figures in his life such as his grandfathers, uncles, male cousins, and male role models. A discussion that from my recollection nowhere did anyone state, suggest, or imply that fathers weren't important and beneficial much less deny it.

 

Not unsurprising that stating the likelihood of other male role models and father figures for guys with single mothers isn't stating that men serve an important function in childrearing and that women aren't perfect parents all by themselves. After all it doesn't fit your mindset of the prevalent misandry with men as the lowest common denominator that is feminism.

 

While not unsurprising as it's you it is amusing for me how you got that spiel from guys with single mothers can likely learn to be a man from:

#1 Male and/or father figures in his life such as grandfathers, uncles, and male cousins

#3 Himself deciding on what kind of man he wants to be using those he admires most, what kind of relationship dynamic he wants, and what kind of partner he wants to be. A self-discovery journey mixing and meshing the male influences, teachings from guys, and males he emulates.

Edited May 28, 2012 by udolipixie

[sally4sara]

Why is it always assumed a single parent would REQUIRE government help to raise their kid(s)? I never received help as a single mother. Most of the single parents I've known did so without welfare or any other government assistance.

 

Always trying to find the bad in people who are just doing the best they can? Somehow they all, at least the single mothers anyway, right? , are getting on with their lives by way of some detriment to you. Whatever Archie Bunker.

 

Sometimes being biologically tied to a child isn't enough for a person to give a damn. What then? The parent who does give a damn is responsible for the disintegration of family values? I would think there would be more finger pointing to the parents who instead have this kind of following:

 

"oh, well I didn't think I needed to pay for anything till you had the courts tell me to"

 

Because its the good parents who value family that need a government to tell them to provide for their children right? OH those were the days!

[Taramere]

Why is it always assumed a single parent would REQUIRE government help to raise their kid(s)? I never received help as a single mother. Most of the single parents I've known did so without welfare or any other government assistance.

 

Always trying to find the bad in people who are just doing the best they can? Somehow they all, at least the single mothers anyway, right? , are getting on with their lives by way of some detriment to you. Whatever Archie Bunker.

 

Pay no heed. The most vociferous ranters and critics have likely never contributed one iota of anything positive and worthwhile to a child's life or to anybody else's life. Their ability to bring happiness into other people's lives is probably zero...and therefore they comfort themselves with bringing endless misery, rage and criticism. Not to mention a dogged determination to hang on to the belief that they are Atlas who might shrug at any moment...while you (and your child) are parasites feeding off them.

 

That belief is probably the only thread by which their fragile self esteem is prevented from crashing to earth - and protecting them from the reality that.

 

a) If they examined their job's worth under a microscope, they would likely find that the delusion that they do something worthwhile is wholly dependent on the very social constructs they despise...and really, contributes nothing remotely, useful, beautiful or otherwise pleasing to the world, and

 

b) you pay your own way and have no need their taxes.

[dasein]

Nice spiel you got from a discussion that stating it's a rule that guys with single mothers have no one to teach them how to be a man overlooks other likely male figures in his life such as his grandfathers, uncles, male cousins, and male role models.

 

The "other male" talk is all transparent rationalization. The stats I posted speak for themselves, and I don't see uncles and cousins mentioned in there, but rather -fathers-. It's plain that you and others have rationalized all around the importance of having fathers in the home, and plain why, or else you would simply state that fathers are very important in the home and leave it at that without all the rationalizations. I doubt you or others will even address, and probably didn't even read, the stats and underlying studies I linked.