Is the Nanny State telling tales?

[Mary Chambers]

Doversoul - I thought you were probably female, but wasn't sure.

So who is going to look after, talk to and educate the children, if the parents don't? Semi-educated childminders? Grandparents, who should be enjoying the freedoms of retirement? (If they haven't yet retired they can't look after grandchildren, and of course they can in any case only do it if they live near enough.) The school day finishes quite early, and there are long holidays. I see children being handed round like parcels, almost regarded as a nuisance, and parents panicking if the children are ill or the school has to close for a day or two. Schools aren't babysitters, but many parents seem to regard them as just that. I see exhausted grandparents caring almost full time for young children, and many of those I have spoken to are a lot more resentful of the situation than they would ever let their children know. It's all a bit sad. Children seem to come bottom of the pile of priorities.

I do know that two incomes are a financial necessity for many, though plenty seem to regard expensive cars and holidays as a necessity. I don't know what the answer is. If people find young children boring and looking after them demeaning I think it tells you all too much about the people. Poor kids. And if housework is demeaning, why is it right to expect someone else to do it? (Not that housework was ever a priority for me!)

I do see the point about being financially dependent. We always regarded the money we had (some of which had been earned by me) as shared, and I assumed we'd stay married - most people did then. Today with so many more couples breaking up, that is more of a worry, I suppose. I was never ambitious in the career sense, although I had a good job before I had the children, and being at home, as I said earlier, does not stop you developing your mind. It does stop you earning money (unless you work from home), but perhaps money isn't always the most important thing. That's probably a revolutionary thing to say in post-Thatcherite Britain.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

There is the danger of making some huge and spurious claims here. Individuals have different skills and needs; many make better parents if they don't have to be with children all the time; others thrive from devoting their efforts solely to bringing up a child/children. Provided a child grows up feeling safe and valued, it matters nothing if s/he's brought up by a single parent or by a large extended family: what is important is that nobody nurturing a child should do so under the duress created from other people's social ideals. It is as bad to regard fathers' nurturing skills as "second best" as it is to impose the burden of childcare on women: parents and children have different skills and needs. Trying to make everyone "fit" into a preconceived mould is invalid and dangerous.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

It's interesting that in a world where women are coming to resemble men more in particular ways (girl gangs, female sex offenders, young smokers and drinkers), people should still feel that children's upbringing is always best served by it being performed by the mother. Women's natural mothering instincts are very convenient for men; maybe not so beneficial for women, or even - necessarily - for their own children. Perhaps?

i do not see why the minor spread of some behaviours is an index of similarity between the sexes .... nor that social norms are an index of fundamental differences ....


and i find the notion that 'women are the 'natural' parent' serves men outrageous, this notion was used by a woman to rip my son out of my life for nearly five years ....

[doversoul1]

and i find the notion that 'women are the 'natural' parent' serves men outrageous, this notion was used by a woman to rip my son out of my life for nearly five years ....

Calum
I am very sorry to hear that, and I know there are individual differences so this is by no means aimed at you but in general, men protests against this notion only when it hurts them. Otherwise, they take it for granted.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

well as one who protested to Bowlby himself i gave up on trying to dissuade the world from this view .... far more promulgated by the social workers and therapists in the 60s and 70s than establishment or bourgeois males who as ever had a somewhat bewildered air about them ....

[french frank]

i do not see why the minor spread of some behaviours is an index of similarity between the sexes .... nor that social norms are an index of fundamental differences ....


and i find the notion that 'women are the 'natural' parent' serves men outrageous, this notion was used by a woman to rip my son out of my life for nearly five years ....

Calum, I'm very sorry if something I said touched on a painful nerve for you. But if you look at what I said I'm sure you would have found support for your view. I was expresssing surprise that 'people should still feel that children's upbringing is always best served by it being performed by the mother'.

Personal experiences count heavily, and perhaps 'abandoned fathers' feel things very differently from 'abandoned children' (as I was).

[Simon]

I was expressing surprise that 'people should still feel that children's upbringing is always best served by it being performed by the mother'.

I can't see what's surprising about that. It's like being surprised that women have breasts with from which the child can take milk. Throughout evolution, and in all primates, the child is looked after early on by the mother. It seems to have been the natural way of things - and nature usually knows best. There are of course going to be exceptions. Some women may make awful mothers, and some men have surely done a wonderful job when left, for example, widowers. But they are nonetheless exceptions.

[MrGongGong]

I can't see what's surprising about that. It's like being surprised that women have breasts with from which the child can take milk. Throughout evolution,

EVOLUTION ?????

tis the work of the devil I tell ye

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

in general, men protests against this notion only when it hurts them.

and women by virtue of biology are immune from self interested posturing?

[Anna]

Personal experiences count heavily, and perhaps 'abandoned fathers' feel things very differently from 'abandoned children' (as I was).

Oh, were you abandoned frenchie? No-one here would ever abandon you! Ever! You are stuck with us! But of course, personal experience, as to what kind of Ma or Pa we had influences us all through life and may influence whether we do, or do not, have children.

Some women may make awful mothers, and some men have surely done a wonderful job when left, for example, widowers. But they are nonetheless exceptions.

Simon, sometimes, I do wonder about you. Widowers. Yes and some do and some don't do a wonderful job. You seem to persist in sweeping statements in black and white. I know two men bringing up their children alone (not widowers!) doing a far better job than the mothers were capable of. I dare not ask (no, don't even answer) what you think of same sex couples raising children!

[doversoul1]

and women by virtue of biology are immune from self interested posturing?

Calum
If you mean that there are women who, when they are separated from their partners, take advantage of this notion and keep children, grab as much money as they can from their ex-partners as well as from the state, yes, I expect that’s not an uncommon thing. In fact I know one and have felt like reporting her to the authority more than once. But I am afraid I don't know enough about the issues in this area to say anything very much.

I do know, in general, men take the notion for granted where work is concerned.

[french frank]

I can't see what's surprising about that. [...] Some women may make awful mothers, and some men have surely done a wonderful job when left, for example, widowers. But they are nonetheless exceptions.

You've contradicted your own point. The key word in my statement was 'always'. If there are, as you concede, exceptions, then the reverse situation cannot always be the case.

I was expressing surprise that 'people should still feel that children's upbringing is always best served by it being performed by the mother'.

[Lateralthinking1]

Sometimes I think this kind of debate would be better served by focussing on what could be described as maternal and paternal traits which are not necessarily always wholly gender related.

On the issue about banning fairy tales - the first post - it is a bit like deciding whether to have a pet dog. Dogs can breed in unfortunate places, tear other animals and each other to pieces, become upsettingly ill and even collide with vehicles.

You can be the kind of parent who says "we must therefore not let our child have a pet dog". Alternatively, you can decide that you will have one but sit the three year old down beforehand and say "first, let me tell you about all of the most awkward and upsetting things a dog can do". I wouldn't recommend either approach.

Dogs have nice shiny coats and are also friendly and fun. Better I think to get the dog with no fuss, let the child enjoy it in its own way, and tackle the issues if and when they happen to arise. Humour always helps.

[Simon]

You've contradicted your own point. The key word in my statement was 'always'. If there are, as you concede, exceptions, then the reverse situation cannot always be the case.

You are so right. I didn't take account of the word "always" in your post. So we agreed anyway.

Although, thinking about it, did anyone actually say that children's upbringing is always best served by their mothers? Or was it one of your hommes de paille?

----====----

Have word with Anna too, will you, please, is it? She did exactly the same with the word "some" when responding to my earlier post.

[french frank]

Although, thinking about it, did anyone actually say that children's upbringing is always best served by their mothers? Or was it one of your hommes de paille?

I didn't realise I was noted for setting up strawmen . I suggest you look at what I said originally (Msg #43) and make your own mind up.

It wasn't part of any argument or a response to a particular point, and therefore not a strawman (off-topic as far as the OP was concerned but I was not alone there). Just generally musing at the way the gender differences in certain respects were becoming blurred.