You were in the process of making a strong case. A case for the father's presence and active involvement with the child. It could have done with a little more, IMHO, but the 'weight' was in that one direction.

And then you blew it. It could be either the mother or the father, you claim - but without a shred of evidence offered to support a case for the mother.

Why did you do that?

Appeasing?

You might be right about the mother, but with a case on one side and sweet sod all on the other, you shoot your own credibility in the foot..

Quote from Percy

You were in the process of making a strong case. A case for the father's presence and active involvement with the child. It could have done with a little more, IMHO, but the 'weight' was in that one direction.

And then you blew it. It could be either the mother or the father, you claim - but without a shred of evidence offered to support a case for the mother.

Why did you do that?

Appeasing?

You might be right about the mother, but with a case on one side and sweet sod all on the other, you shoot your own credibility in the foot..

Interesting response.

I wonder how likely it is that someone who has named his blog "Objectify Chicks!" would be tempted to appease the spirit of the age?

Perhaps it is more likely that I genuinely believe, as I stated in the blog posting, that kids desperately need TWO parents (of opposing/complimenting sexes), and that if the norm was for kids to be ripped from their mothers and placed with their fathers, the results might be much the same.

When it comes to parenting, it is not an issue of whether mothers are preferable to fathers. It is rather that a child needs both a mother and a father, and our draconian, female-inspired and -utilized divorce laws simply 1) favor the female and 2) in favoring the female, make her ultimately responsible for the social carnage that results from the single-parent home.

And while I recognize that 2) above is true, I do not maintain that it would be different if it were fathers that were being favored rather than mothers.

Perhaps it is more likely that I genuinely believe, as I stated in the blog posting, that kids desperately need TWO parents (of opposing/complimenting sexes),

I don't doubt that you do, JJ, from all your other posts, and I would agree.

My point was that you make the case for the father but just accept an unstated case for the mother.

That's all.

The fact that even I can see that it might be construed as appeasement should be telling you that others with a less charitable outlook definitely would.

Or maybe it was that I didn't express myself well.

Quote from Percy

I don't doubt that you do, JJ, from all your other posts, and I would agree.

My point was that you make the case for the father but just accept an unstated case for the mother.

That's all.

The fact that even I can see that it might be construed as appeasement should be telling you that others with a less charitable outlook definitely would.

Or maybe it was that I didn't express myself well.

I guess there are arguments that are sufficient according to formal rules of logic, and articles that are sufficient for reality.

By the formal rules of logic, yes, I suppose that in order to win the point, I should also establish that women are appropriate parents.

But when viewed in light of reality, the fact is that women are already not only considered fit parents by society, but also the de facto parent of choice by the legal system. I guess I felt no compulsion to argue that that women are ALSO appropriate parents in light of a societal outlook which already considers them to be the ONLY necessary parent.

My purpose was to say, "While I agree that moms are necessary, dads are necessary as well."

kids do best with both parents ideally but life isn't always ideal.
kids can grow up fine with just a mum.
i truly hope that is so because my best girlfriend is now a widow and she has her son to raise and is struggling without her beloved husband.
kids can do well with just a dad too.
i think the problem is when kids have a dad (living) but doesn't get to see him.
they feel abandoned.

The missing father.... he is missed. I think that sums it up.

Just re reading before posting.... beloved husband.... not something you hear very often is it. How sad.

I agree with Contraeverything here. Two parents are the way nature designed us. when one is missing, i think it will eventually fall apart. where are the stats that say kids do better with single dads than single moms? i am a single dad and i wish ebveryday that these girls had a mom around to help raise them. They need it bad they are girls. i know i do a good job with them but they know that most other kids have moms and they dont. I know my sons, who live with my ex wife know that other kids have dads and they dont. I know all 4 kids involved in this sinario want a mom and a dad. to voluntarily rob them of either is irresponsible but what does my opinion matter? i didnt want to get divorced and do this but here we are. when they are all grown up we will see who fares better, the kids of single dad or the kids of single mom. i suspect they will all be damaged in some way or another.

KO

Quote from contraeverything

The impact of the loss of a father on both boys and girls is wholly negative, in spite of the feminist myth that only mothers are necessary to effectively rear children.

The impact upon boys is well-known. When boys do not have a positive male role model in their lives, the middle part of the behavior bell-curve tends to be erased. Young boys tend to adopt extremes in behavior - becoming prissy (even adopting homosexuality, see sources below) or becoming so frustrated with an emotional mother attempting to act as a stable authority figure that he rebels and becomes aggressive, overly macho, or even criminal.

The impact upon girls is just becoming known (see sources below). Studies show that the single greatest factor in predicting "success" for a teenage girl (no matter how it is defined: avoidance of addiction, avoidance of jail, progression in education, stability of a future marriage, etc.) is the presence of a stable male authority figure in her life. Girls without fathers show exponentially higher likelihood of pregnancy prior to marriage, of contraction of STDs, of psychological instability, and of criminal tendencies.

Following Columbine, there was significant interest in the "profile" of unstable, delinquent, and violent teenagers. Numerous studies were done to try and determine the significant factors that might indicate a child would grow up into a troubled teen or adult. One Columbia University study found that, in single-parent homes where the mother is the head of the home, a child is 30% more likely than the average child to become involved in drugs, alcohol, and violence.

The FBI conducted a similar study and found that, in the history of school shootings there was a peculiar profile which was called "The Classroom Avenger" profile. All 17 school shooters up to the time of Columbine had in common that they were from homes in which the father was absent, distant, or not involved in parenting.

For 30 years, Johns Hopkins University attempted to find contributing factors to various social and medical ills, including suicide, mental illness, and heart disease. After following 1377 people for three decades, there was only one factor common enough to bear a causal relationship to all of these various maladies: that factor was closeness to parents, and particularly the father.

In my opinion, what these studies show is not necessariy the value of the father per se - I expect that the same sorts of problems would be produced by a culture that endorsed motherless homes in the same way that our culture has endorsed and encouraged fatherless homes. But rather, it is not that a child needs a father in order to have the best chance at success in life, but a child (male or female) needs BOTH a father and a mother.

An incredible harvest will be reaped by our world in the very near future. We may simply consider the alternating aggressiveness, flatness, overmedication, lack of ambition, and frankly, lack of intelligence and morals to be a social problem adhering to this generation of fatherless children. But someday this generation of fatherless children is going to grow up.... What then?

----------

Check the sources used for this article at Objectify Chicks!

""But someday this generation of fatherless children is going to grow up.... What then?""

waaal !

the Labor Party indroduced the Single Mothers pension in 1972 when the Pinkos ascended to office here in Australia and almost simultaneousythe No fault dovorce ( to momma born without fault like the immaculate conception the are)

there iis the boot for dads posterior and the wherewithal for the clewless momma to live on -of course they get cheap housing too and a plethora of benefits from the social security for the rest of their cotton pickin lives

dad was written outta the family equation forthwith - a mere sexist sperm donor hahhahahh and of no consequence

two generations have already "grown up" and they must be part of the ever incresing nation of feckless uneducated demoralised boys collecting social security payments and selling druggs to boost their income and trashing city walls with graffiti

of course thie is all on course and up to speed for the femiit creed

Quote from pixie61

kids do best with both parents ideally but life isn't always ideal.
kids can grow up fine with just a mum.
i truly hope that is so because my best girlfriend is now a widow and she has her son to raise and is struggling without her beloved husband.
kids can do well with just a dad too.
i think the problem is when kids have a dad (living) but doesn't get to see him.
they feel abandoned.

The missing father.... he is missed. I think that sums it up.

Just re reading before posting.... beloved husband.... not something you hear very often is it. How sad.

""The missing father.... he is missed. I think that sums it up.""

did you read about the middle of the behaviour bell curve is missing part of that succinct Essay of contra everything

that is !!they make the bricks without straw under the feminit desired paradigm

Quote from contraeverything

I guess there are arguments that are sufficient according to formal rules of logic, and articles that are sufficient for reality.

By the formal rules of logic, yes, I suppose that in order to win the point, I should also establish that women are appropriate parents.

But when viewed in light of reality, the fact is that women are already not only considered fit parents by society, but also the de facto parent of choice by the legal system. I guess I felt no compulsion to argue that that women are ALSO appropriate parents in light of a societal outlook which already considers them to be the ONLY necessary parent.

My purpose was to say, "While I agree that moms are necessary, dads are necessary as well."

By the very nature of the way the family court system is biased in the UK, it would appear a body has already established that women are the appropriate parent.

I believe this to be the original posters logic.