Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    
    Considering that 57% of all black families are currently headed by
    women, your statement has frightening implications about the next
    generation of black men.
    
    However, if you watched the movie "Boyz N The Hood", the same message
    is portrayed, i.e. that boys who are raised by women do not learn to
    become "men".
    
    I think this is inaccurate.  I am not sure I would call Isaiah Thomas
    "unmanly". In fact, I've met many men who do not live up to your
    depiction.
    
    But that's not to say that you're way off base, either. What I have
    noticed is that some males who were not guided by a firm hand, male or
    female, in their youth, have struck me as "different". Some to the
    point of effeminacy.  
    
    One other thing to point out, though. Many males do not have a
    "father", but there are still strong male role models in their lives. I
    think at some point, males gravitate toward strength, from any source,
    as a role model. 
    
    But hey, I could be way off base, m'self!  I don't know *THAT* many
    males...

    re 
    <black>
    
    I believe it is probably STILL the case that the majority of all
    famililes headed by a woman are headed by a white woman. (in the U.S.
    of A.)
    Indeed, the phenomenon of black families without a man present is
    _quite_ new as I understand it. A post world war II northern city
    phenomenon only.

    re: .0 (Marv)
    
    I'm not certain what motivated you to enter this, but it seems to me
    you have painted a rather large number of people with an
    extraordinarily wide brush.  In other words, you, like most people who
    indulge in such sweeping generalities, are wrong.  
    
    Mike

    Mike,
    
      In an attempt (apparently not entirely successful) to avoid painting
    with a broad brush I deliberately used words and phrases such as
    "decidedly unscientific", "hard to express" and "this seems".  
    
      I have personal reasons for asking opinions on the subject
    which directly effect my life.  I am serious in wanting to know of the
    experience and observation of others.  
    
      Your note offers nothing by way of helping understand the QUESTION I
    raised.  What do you think about the QUESTION?  
    
      It didn't strike me when I wrote the note that I may put off some men
    who were raised by single women.  For that I would be sorry.  Could that 
    be why you jumped on me rather than try to help me understand the
    situation?
    
    Marv
    

    Anybody who would argue that single parents do not have some built-in
    disadvantages with respect to rearing a child is a fool.
    Anybody who would argue that children have not suffered as a result of
    single parenting is a fool.
    
    
    Anybody who would argue that a single parent cannot do it alone is a fool
    Anybody who would argue that it has never been done, is a fool.
    Anybody who would argue that children do not sometimes benefit from
    the absence of a specific malevolent parent is a fool.

    RE: .4  Mike Smith

    > I'm not certain what motivated you to enter this, but it seems to me
    > you have painted a rather large number of people with an
    > extraordinarily wide brush.  

    Most definitely.

    > In other words, you, like most people who indulge in such sweeping 
    > generalities, are wrong.  

    My experience (as a single Mom who raised a son) has been quite the
    contrary.  My son isn't violent, but he's most definitely not passive.
    He has a tendency to be a dominant personality.
    
    Suzanne (...on vacation...)

>    "decidedly unscientific", "hard to express" and "this seems".  
    
    Hmmm.  Yes.  Well, the men I know who were raised by their mothers
    were all highly intelligent, highly competitive in sports, and
    high achievers in general.  I'm thinking of three in particular.  
    All are slightly more feminine than their counterparts who had strong
    male role models, but who cares?  Two were two of the best friends
    I've ever had.  The other one was much younger than me and just
    an acquaintance.  
    
    					- Vick

    The replies in .4, .7, and .8 don't cut you any slack.

    Can you shed any light on why their authors might be unwilling to cut
    you any slack?

    A strong-willed single woman can raise a child just as well as a
    strong-willed single man and just as well as a couple.
    
    It doesn't take genitals to raise a child properly, but it does
    take determination.

    re .-1
    yup, already said that.

    Yah, but I said it better.  ;^)

    Marv, maybe I hit you on this one a bit harder than I ought.  But the
    way the question was phrased, I couldn't help but feel that this was
    very much a loaded question.  I guess it took me a little by surprise,
    because, while I don't know you personally, I had formed an opinion of
    you based on other notes you have written,  and this one seemed a
    little out of character.  Perhaps I should have been more discerning.

    Anyway, I will attempt to answer your questions.  In my experience,
    boys raised by a single mother are no more likely to have any or all of
    the characteristics that you describe than one raised in a two parent
    family. 
    
    In order to answer your question in the affirmative, one has to assume
    an awful lot, not least of which is that all single mothers share the
    same values about child rearing and the same personalities.  One also
    has to assume that all the boys raised by single mothers are a blank
    slate, and will react the same to the stereotypical mother we had to
    assume earlier.  I'm sure that a little thought will reassure you that
    such is not the case.  All children come into a family with their own
    personality, and all women bring different values to the family as
    well.  Further, even if a boy is raised by a single mother, that
    doesn't mean he will have no positive contact with adult male role
    models during his childhood.  He will undoubtedly have several; in
    school, if he plays team sports, his coaches, male relatives, and so
    on.
       
    However, this is not to say that there are plenty of chances for some
    difficulties.  A lot will depend on why it is the mother is single, how
    she feels about men, and how she relates that information to her son. 
    Mostly, if the boy grows up in an atmosphere of love and acceptance,
    then he will be just fine.  Especially if there is loving contact with
    extended family members who are willing to give a bit of emotional
    support.
    
    Mike

    While I have noticed that people expect to find a big difference
    between boys raised by two parents and those raised by their mothers
    alone, I have also noticed that there isn't that great a difference.
    
    I've been involved with fatherless boys through a program called Big
    Brothers (don't know if they have it in the US) where individuals are
    paired up with fatherless boys and spend time together doing whatever
    they feel like doing.  The boys that I've met through this program have
    ranged from extroverted-Calvin-like terrors to quiet bookworms. 
    
    Of the four boys I knew, the only common pattern was short tempers on
    all of them.  Maybe it was misdirected hostile feelings towards their
    fathers or maybe it was short tempers.  Probably just short tempers.

    To me, short tempers can only mean that they are carrying around
    a lot of anger with them. Anger can be a reflection of the resentment
    of their situation.
    
    I have known boys raised by single mothers that were decidedly
    effeminate in their behavior. What is all comes down to, and there
    is no hard and fast rule, is that there has to be a strong
    male role model somewhere in the kid's life, whether or not it is
    the father. I think most of parenting is role-modeling, on both sides
    of the equation, and a mother can't role-model a male role. This is
    not to say that there are not many things that both parents can't role
    model.
    
    Just my opinion.
    
    -roger
    
    
    

    
    Marv you have made some interesting observations indeed. I do
    have a son and I have been divorced since he was 3. He plays
    Rugby, which I think some people consider a "manly" sport.
    
    I have had some women tell me over the years that they prefer men
    from single mother homes, the guys are more self-reliant, 
    self-confident, more caring and willing to express their true feelings.
    
    I am wondering exactly what do you mean by "lack an understanding
    of what being a male involves"??????? I know you said it's hard
    to express, but I wish you would try.
    
    

In those societies around the world that practice(d) initiation rites boys 
were taken from their mothers at puberty, frequently with a symbolic show of 
force, and brought into the world of men.  This reflects the necessary 
balance that single parent families cannot provide.  Organisations like Big 
Brothers are fulfilling this need for archetypal balance in a society which 
stupidly pretends that gender is of little or no consequence.

 Re: Marv's request to answer the question

 I believe this string demonstrates one of the key shortcomings of electronic
written media. Marv has noticed something that he wishes to comment on and
on which he wishes to elicit comments from others. He necessarily has to
use general terms to describe the phenomenon in question, because it
is a pattern of behavior followed by some but not all people in a certain 
situation. The very fact that he must speak in general terms guarantees
the objections of a certain segment of the population who apparently believe
that generalizations are to be avoided at all costs simply because counter
examples exist. So the topic gets ratholed with "broad brush" accusations,
meanwhile the particular phenomenon that Marv was trying to address is
danced around but never confronted.

 Fortunately, there has been some movement towards discussing the issue in
the later replies, but the ratholing and accusing notes were the first to
come in. I wonder how this phenomenon can be addressed...

    I have never believed that a son of a single women would lack in
    compassion, sensitivity and a willingness to express his emotions. 
    Quite the contrary.  My observations lead me to believe that these
    children are more than willing to express their emotions and are *ver*
    sensitive to criticism.
    
    I'm guessing that to make my point easier to understand it could help
    by listing some of the things I mean.
    
    These children may not:
     - know a wrench from a pair of plyers
     - have never mowed a lawn
     - know what a sport coat is
     - know how to cook or clean or do laundry
     
    Why?  Mom *usually* doesn't know about tools or do the heavy yard work,
    or use male terms for clothing, or she will do most or all of the
    cooking, cleaning or laundry.
    
    These boys tend to be intimidated by strong males.  Their mothers send
    messages that "toughness" is not something to be.  They tend to seek
    out others for consolation rather than consoling themselves.  They seem
    to relate best to children younger than themselves or adults rather
    than peers.  
    
    I took one such kid on a camping trip.  He knew nothing of making a
    fire.  Couldn't cook.  Sat around waiting to told what to do rather
    than just doing something.  Was afraid when the sun went down.  Got
    scared by noises from the woods.  Hyperventilated in the tent and
    barffed on my and his sleeping bags.  Didn't even try to get out of the
    tent.  I had seen him vomit at home twice without trying to get to the
    bathroom.  'Its okay honey, mommy will take care of it.'  
    
    I live with this child and personally know of four others that are
    almost identical in nature.  They are insecure when mom is gone,
    calling her several times throughout the night.
    
    My son has come a long way since my wife and I married.  I can see the
    progress but it is extremely difficult to not be seem as a tyrant due
    to all the guidance I must provide.
    
    In social situations he and the other kids seem to become background. 
    They try to blend in and not be noticed.  They flinch often when
    approached by men.  They brag to other kids and adults.  They exagerate
    their ability.
    
    I love my son very much but I and my wife agree that he and the other
    kids we know are way out of tune with that hard to describe "male"
    thing.
    
    I know they can get it in time and with properly balanced influences. 
    Until my arrival, just about all of the male role models my son had
    were drunks or loud or irresponsible whom my wife told him to keep his
    distance.  Although he's never been hit by a man, and I'll never strike
    a child, he seems to expect it any moment.  I'm not surprised that he 
    would have some hang ups.  However I was very surprised that he had not 
    at least learned some of the things I mentioned.  For lack of a better
    word, I blame his mother however he's the one that has to learn and I'm
    the one who has to teach and that makes my seem like a tyrant.
    
    Maybe that's why I am sometimes so angry about this.  I must take the heat
    for what others failed to provide.  I'm sure I'm doing the right thing
    but it still hurts.
    
    Please notice I realize that this need not be nor is it true of all
    sons of single women.  Nor does it mean they are doomed to an adulthood
    of insecurity.  
    
    Marv
    P.S. By writing this I think I learned something about myself.  Is this
    *really* a complaint about the "Its a dirty job but somebody's got to
    do it?"  Probably but its more as well.
    

    I think that children raised without one of the parents will likely
    reflect that in many ways (some good, some unfortunate)
    Just how they are likely to reflect that is dependent on several
    factors
    
    		a) genetics
    		b) the kind of parent the single parent is w.r.t.
    			values
    			priorities
    			sensitivities
    		c) the kind of access the child has to adult members of the 
    		   other gender.
    		d) others that i'm sure I have overlooked
    
    It is clear to me that having two relatively healthy and
    well-adjusted parents is preferable to have only one such parent. It is
    also clear to me that having the specific 'missing' parent may be worse
    that lacking the specific 'missing' parent.
    
    				herb

    Marv,
    
    Now I understand your perspective on this.  When my wife and I married,
    she had three kids, the oldest of which was a boy.  He was nine at the
    time, but he had some of the problems that you describe.  It as a
    difficult situation to deal with, let me tell you, and not just for me.
    It was hard on the entire family.  Might I suggest that you and your
    wife get some professional counseling for your son, for two reasons.
    One is it might help him uncover some pretty strong negative feelings
    that he might be harboring about himself and people in general, and
    help him deal with them.  The other reason is that the therapist might
    be able to help you and your wife gain some insight on how your son is
    feeling, and perhaps give some hints on how to deal with him in
    mutually constructive ways.  The only advice I can offer is to be
    patient, be accepting, and spend as much quality time with him as you
    can.  Easy to say, damned difficult to carry through.
    
    I wish you well, Marv.  I really do.
    
    Mike 
          

    Marv:
    
    There is only one way for you to teach your son.
    Love him,like yourself, and be the kind of man you ARE. You can't very
    well teach him attributes that you don't have yourself.
    If you love and respect him, and yourself, you and he are likely to do
    fine. Do NOT make the mistake of thinking that other men or women can
    tell you what the important things are to teach. What's important is
    what you ARE not what you KNOW.
    Show him by your behavior that it is not necessary to be loud, or
    bullying, or drunk.
    (and if he needs therapeutic assistance, so be it)
    
    			best of luck
    			herb

    Thanks for the perspective everyone.  
    
    
    Marv
    

    
    
    sorry but I have to disagree with .0
    
    Both my brothers are neither of what you describe.  Both are
    very selfconfident and self assured.  One is passive to a degree,
    but no more so than any other sibling.  Mom raised all of us 
    to believe in who we are and in our abilities.  
    
    Comparing my two brothers with friends of mine from two parent
    families is kind of hard as most of my friends are from divorced
    families.  From the few men I do know who were raised in a two
    parent family, I see far less self esteem and self confidence.
    I also see a problem with these folks getting along with other
    men easily.
    
    Michele

    I believe there is potential for large loss when a man is raised by a
    woman.  This scenario is not necessarily only prevalent in divorce but 
    could include workaholics, alcoholics, simple neglect, etc..

    The results are not always as obvious as a lack of traditional macho
    characteristics (though often prevalent) but rather :

    o Sublime guilt associated with being a man.

    o Over sensitivity to female issues.

    o Lack of a credible male identity.

    o While often very masculine, not able to associate with themselves
      comfortable with traditional male roles.

    Certainly there are occasions when there is no sensible alternative but it
    appears that many fathers (and mothers) discount the serious impact a
    male presence (or lack thereof) may have on their sons.

    As I'm sure you can gather, I was enamored of Bly's book.

    -Bob

     

    I read in the news the other day that: "All things being equal in a 
    custody case, the woman gets the child(ren)".  Women talk about lack
    of euality....!!!! If THIS isn't a glaring example of descrimination
    against fathers I don't know what is.  
    
    I have worked in youth groups over the years.  For some years back in
    the 1970's I was a 'Big Brother' in the Boston Big Brother Assn.  One
    of the qualifying rules was that the potential "Little Brother" had to
    have been deserted by his dad as in divorce or the father taking off.
    I was the Big Brother of a boy from about 1968 (the boy was 7 when the
    relationship started) until he grew up and took off on his own. 
    Certainly I and other males in his life provided male role models for
    him.  Boys WATCH men and other boys to learn how to behave as girls do
    women and other girls.  IMO the biggest impact on a boy living with his
    mother is likely to be in a lack of discipline coming from a dad living
    in the same home.  Certainly a mother provides discipline, but in the
    style a mother would provide.  Nature provided children with TWO
    parents for a reason IMO.  TWO people provide checks and balances on
    one another.  Raising a kid is HARD!  Two heads are better than one,
    and all that.  I think part of the reason some people observe different
    behavior in these boys is that in coming from a single parent home the
    mother is usually working, so not only does the kid not have a dad on
    the scene but he is often deprived of his mother TOO during the after
    school hours.  Often the mother is stressed out trying to raise the
    kid, pay the rent, hold down her job, and all the other issues which
    parents face.  IMO on the average, children are far better off living
    with two parents rather than one for some of the reasons I cited above.
    
    I did notice that boys who did not have a dad living with them tended
    to gravitate toward other men who represented father figures. 
    Certainly that suggests that the boys NEED a dad on the scene. 
    
    I think the boys need a mother just as badly as they need their father,
    but the context of this note is boys without their father on the scene,
    not boys without mothers on the scene.
    
    Jeff

>    I believe there is potential for large loss when a man is raised by a
>    woman. 

 I think the same could be said of daughters being raised without a father,
or sons or daughters being raised without a mother. Being raised by both
parents is probably ideal. Indeed, the larger the group of caring adults
a child is surrounded with, the better for the child. I believe that a
child raised by a man and a woman will tend to have a more rounded upbringing
than a child raised by a single parent of either sex. (This, of course, does
not preclude counterexamples, but rather speaks to the situation as a whole.)

    I was raised without a father by my saint of a mother.  It taught me to
    be self-sufficent, NEVER to rely on public assistance, only to rely on
    myself and the family if need be (as my mother did - raising three kids
    and one is handicapped severely).  None of us have ever gotten into any
    trouble with the law, with drugs.  I don't believe my sister and I who
    are married have "dysfunctional" relationships, either.  I think I
    learned from mom's problems and as a result, my marriage is a strong
    and communicative one.  I don't use soceity as "scapegoat" for any
    problems in my life, be it health, financial, whatever.  I lived single
    and alone for 12 years before I got married and didn't wimp out of
    life.  I realize that I learned this strength of heart and soul and
    mind by seeing my mother's trials and tribulations.  Now mom is happily
    married but during my formative years she was totally alone.  Grandpa
    was the only male authority figure in my life and I think if you ask my
    husband if my mom did a good job raising me to be what he considers a
    "good" wife and if I will make a good mom -- he will say "yes"
    emphatically.
    
    Not all people raised by one parent turn out to be dregs of humanity. 
    I feel it is the effort the parent puts into the child rearing, as well
    as the example they set for those children, makes what the child
    becomes.  If a child grows up dysfunctional in some way, I would have
    to say that based on my experiences with messed up people (and I've had
    plenty) the example the immediate family sets for those children are
    what messes people up.  IMHO, sorry.
    
    Tammi

    re. Marv
    
    The 'syndrome' [for lack of a better word] you describe is one I've
    notice frequently in my years of working with children of both sexes.
    Based upon my experience, I would not have limited it to fatherless
    boys.  I have found that many children from an over-controlled
    environments that foster dependency -- both too structured and too
    protective -- exhibit severe anxiety when separated from them.
    
    I have known many little men who, when separated from harshly demanding
    parents, want only nurture and care-taking. They frankly do not know
    how to cope with an un-bounded environment.  They cry, they cling,
    their helplessness is not that of one who doesn't know _how_, but
    rather one who doesn't know when or if.  On the other hand, those
    who've been overly protected or cosseted exhibit the same behaviours
    out of the helplessness of not knowing how.  Both extremes lack vital
    survival skills.  Both lack self-reliance, either because it has been
    stifled or because it is useless when not complemented by other skills.
    
    I must confess that your list of missing knowledges took me quite aback.
    I was surprised that an inability to differentiate tools, lack of
    yard-work skills, would be associated with the lack of a strong male
    presence in the household. Based upon my own, admittedly empirical,
    knowledge I would have stated that the lack of a strong male presence
    in the vicinity would have dictated that the female would acquire these
    skills.  Apparently my experiences have been quite different from
    yours.
    
      Annie

    As with many generalizations, this one does not bear up well under
    close examination.  There are just too many exceptions.
    
    My husband was 7 when his father died.  His mother never remarried.  He
    is on the macho side, very handy with tools, and like high-risk sports. 
    He is a very competent camper and hunter.  His father did influence him
    to like using tools, but after age 7 he was on his own.  He learned
    camping, fire-making, and cooking in the scouts, and excelled.  He
    had many male role models including uncles, teachers, and scout
    leaders.  No one predominated.
    
    My cousin's parents divorced when he was very young.  He saw his father
    often while growing up, but his father has severe emotional problems. 
    My cousin is confident, has inner happiness, is very self-reliant.  He
    enjoys taking bare-boat cruises in the Caribbean with his friends. 
    He's a sophisticated New Yorker, a successful salesman, and close to
    gaining an MBA.
    
    I would make the point that being masculine (or feminine) is almost
    entirely culturaly defined, btw.  Both my husband and my cousin are
    masculine, each in his own way.
    
    I wish Marv well in his new fatherhood.
    
    Laura

RE:  Note 752.0   XCUSME::MACINTYRE                                    

    
>      I've noticed that these boys know little of self-reliance, 
>    self-confidence or assertiveness.  They are passive, self-centered to a
>    high degree and, for lack of a better term, crybabies.

Marv,

I understand what you're saying.  A lot of the above describes my son.  He's
gotten better as he gotten older, (12 now).  I've gotten him better since I
have put him in golf lessons, taught him how to snow ski, etc.  I'm about to
start teaching him karate and boxing.  It amazes me at times how he doesn't
know anything about common hand tools.  I've taken him to baseball and
basketball games, and I have to explain the basics of the game and what is
happening.  All this shows me how little time his mom spends with him.  I'd
hate to think of what he'd be like now if I had no time with him.  In teaching
him to ski, I really had to encourage him so he wouldn't just up and quit. 
Same with golf.  Ya have to convince him that he's got a talent for it and
should pursue it.  He's still not out-going enough when put into a group. 
Hopefully, when I get custody, I can get him into some group sports.

    I was thinking about this string, and the assumptions about
    "masculinity" it implies.
    
    Just for the heck of it, take one of these descriptions of a "problem"
    boy and change the gender to female.  Change son to daughter.  
    
    For example, "She can't light a fire.  She can't sleep in a camping
    tent.  She can't use hand tools.  She is passive."
    
    Is this any more attractive in a female?  Isn't she just as badly
    equipped for life as the boy originally described?  If it seems worse 
    when applied to boys that's only because our expectations for girls 
    are lower.
    
    I believe that both boys and girls need encouragement and training to
    be competent, independent people.   I believe that strength, use of
    basic tools, ability to handle money, basic nature savvy (such as
    telling direction by the sun's position), as well as ability to cook,
    do simple sewing repairs, and keeping your space fairly clean, are
    desireable attributes in BOTH sexes.
    
    I hope that the men who put such care and time into raising their sons
    do not ignore their daughters' need for a strong guiding hand.
    
    Laura

    -1
    
    I don't have a daughter.
    
    There are some things a son can only get from a man.
    There is an important bonding that is needed between a son and an older
    man.  On this, I agree with Robert Bly.
    

    Raising sons and raising daughters is not a zero sum game, is it?
    
    Does forming that special father-son bond (which I agree is important)
    preclude forming a special father-daughter bond?
    
    Don't daughters need the same life skills as sons?  Wimpiness is just as
    despicable in a female as in a male, to me.
    
    Of course, if you don't have a daughter, it's a moot point for you
    personally.  -:)  
    
    My reaction here, as previously in MENNOTES is,
    
    "Hey dudes.  Give yourself a break.  Take off a load.  You're ok the
    way you are.  Your sons are ok the way they are.  You don't have to be
    John Wayne, Rambo, or the latest macho icon.  Just be yourself and
    shine on."
    
    Laura

        RE:  Note 752.34  TNPUBS::STEINHART                                    

        >Take off a load.  You're ok the way you are.  Your sons are ok the
        >way they are.  You don't have to be John Wayne, Rambo, or the
        >latest macho icon.  Just be yourself and shine on."

        If that were true, why are there so many self-help books and
        shrinks in business?  Answer:  Everyone is not okay.  And what's
        wrong with John Wayne or Rambo?  What's wrong with macho?  Do you
        not value these differences?  You can be preceived as putting down
        these traits.  That's okay, if thats how you feel.  Heck, I have
        problem with PCigits myself, and that's okay for me.  As with most
        parents, I'll probably influence my son with my views.

        Extreme example:  Use your above quote on Charles Mansion.

    Laura, some of the expectations for a daughter are different from the
    expectations of a son.  No one said different expectations mean that
    the expectations for the girl are LOWER.  Just different.  In GENERAL
    I would expect a boy to like and be handy with machinery than I would
    (is that an example of my sexist expectations?, call it that if you
    want), a girl.  WHY would I expect this?  Because over the years I have
    observed that in general men/boys tend to like tools and machinery more
    than girls do. Therefore, I learned to expect that interest more from a
    boy than from a girl.  Its fine if a girl has that interest... its just
    that I would not expect it as much.  Another example: in general its
    been my observation that boys are far more interested in hunt/chase
    games than girls are.  Cultural? Learned?  Yes, partially I would say...
    but it is interesting that the men are expected to do the hunting in
    primative cultures rather than females.  Is this pure chance that the
    men were picked to do the hunting? I dare say no... the cultures
    learned that the men in general liked to hunt more than most women.
    
    There are a range of interests/skills that girls and women tend to be
    interested in and excell in rather than men/boys.  Such as, nurturing
    children, or certain social skills.  I don't see that as better any
    more than being handy with tools is.
    
    I get annoyed at the people who say that men and women, girls and boys
    MUST be EXACTLY the same in inate ability no matter what the skill or
    activity.  There ARE differences between the sexes (which go beyond
    physical differences) which TEND to bring out excellence in each of the
    sexes relative to the activity and the sex of the person.
    
    Jeff

    <Raising sons and raising daughters is not a zero sum game, is it?
    Nope, if by that you mean that all the gains of parenting a son must be
    offset by losses in the raising of daughters (or vice versa)
    
    <Does forming that special father-son bond (which I agree is important)
    <preclude forming a special father-daughter bond?
    I don't think so. On the other hand, I wonder whether it is the case
    that the influence on same gender offspring is more formative and more
    important than the parental influence for opposite gender kids?
    
    				herb
     
    

    Re .36: You say there are a range of skills that women _tend_ to
    be good at or interested in; possibly true, but in my experience it
    varies so widely that it's hard to pin down. (Some of the best
    homemakers I ever knew cordially  hated many of the tasks they were
    supposed to be "interested" in - they did them because they had to be
    done.) 
    
    Skills involving the use of tools aren't any more a male province than
    a female one; it's just that our culture has a list of "female tools"
    (sewing needles, washing machines, ovens) and a list of "male tools"
    (cars, wrenches, hammers). It seems obvious to me that every kid ought
    to learn his or her way around the most commonly-used tools, whether
    they like it or not; they need never use a hammer or an oven again, but
    at least they'll have the basic knowledge of it. Why force all boys to
    learn to use saws and all girls to learn to use sewing machines when
    neither group is going to become exclusively carpenters or
    seamstresses? Do you believe it's more important for a boy to learn to
    use a hammer than it is for a girl to learn the same - and, if so, why?
    Because some people will think less of a boy who can't drive a nail in
    two strokes than of a girl who can't? Frankly, in my experience, this
    doesn't come up all that often... (Personally, I tend to think less of
    people who use gender as an excuse to get out of chores, be it the
    woman who won't even try to change her own tire, not through any real
    disability but because she was taught that it's a man's job, or the man
    who won't even try to change his own kid's diaper, for the same
    reason.)
    
    Re .37, and whether "the influence on same gender offspring is more
    formative and more important than the parental influence for opposite
    gender kids?" I've heard this argued both ways. In my case, my father
    is much more of an influence and a role-model for me than my mother,
    because I am mentally and temperamentally more like him, and we have
    more interests in common. [Or am I more like him because he was my
    primary role-model? Dunno.] This wasn't due to any negligence on Mom's
    part, just on a very basic preference that always seemed to be there.
    My sister is definitely "Mom's kid," and I'm definitely Dad's, and so
    in my experience gender has little to do with appropriateness as a role
    model. [On the other hand, since I was lucky enough to have both my
    parents in a close family setting during my developing years, it would
    be hard to prove that one or the other was a more vital influence.]
    
    -b

    or are you -perhaps- more like him because you are a second daughter
    (if you are) and your first preference for a 'role model' -mother- was
    'already taken'?
    
    
    				herb

    Herb
    
    It's more likely that she's more like her father because she's the
    oldest (without knowning Beth's birth order)... it is far more
    common for first daughters to take after daddy and subsequent ones
    to take after mom.
    
    Bonnie

    mmmm
    then our daughters are not typical.
    mebbee in our case the first option (for the first daughter) was such a
    downer that she took the only remaining option.
    and then the second one HAD no option (but to pick me)

    Who said anything about forcing kids to use or not use certain tools?
    I agree that both boys and girls should be taught to use the 'common
    tools' such as a hammer and a needle and thread irrespective of gender.
    Why was it that I was fascinated by tools (as a male?) and my sister
    could care less?  I know, individual differences.  Why do more men
    choose to be carpenters than women? Is it training by culture, or
    preference?  I can't prove it, but I bet its preference.
    
    This is a no win/loose argument.  If there is any topic in notes which
    has been batted back and forth with no firm conclusions I think this
    one (difference between the sexes) must be close to the top of the
    list.  You stick with your insistance that there is little inate
    difference and I will stick by my observations.
    
    Jeff
    

    Re .40: Right, I'm the eldest. [Of course, I may be an anomaly; I
    recall reading that kids get along better with the parent they _least_
    resemble, temperament-wise, and I don't think that's so in my case.
    Objective observers might disagree. ;-)] I can't begin to know what I'd
    be like if I'd lost either parent at an early age; since both of my
    folks are terrific people, I like to think that either one of them
    could have raised us just fine, but there's no way to tell how it would
    have changed us. Interestingly enough, in light of the "gender roles"
    theme, I don't have a strong sense of "femaleness" - I think of myself
    as a person first, then maybe a software engineer or a fantasy
    role-player, with "a woman" well down the list - is that because I
    identified with Dad, or did I identify with Dad because I was born
    without that "identity"? And does anybody think that that makes me
    "less," somehow; that each person _should_ identify strongly with their
    own sex? Should one's sex be the most important factor in one's
    personality? Now, _I_ don't think so, but I get the feeling that some
    of the folks who are concerned about a boy not learning "what it is to
    be a man" feel that this sense of "manhood" is more important than any
    other attribute of human-ness, and I've certainly heard women claim
    similar feelings about the importance of "being a woman". (I don't
    _hate_ being a woman, mind you; it's just there, of slightly less
    significance in my daily life than being 5'3" and wearing glasses.)
    
    Re .42: Hey, I'm not denying the existence of innate preferences or
    abilities. I'm just saying that (a) it's next to impossible to prove,
    given the strong cultural bias, and (b) I don't think it should matter
    when one is looking at what to teach individual kids - or when trying
    to provide role-models for them. Maybe boys are more interested in
    gadgetry than girls, in general, but you don't parent "kids in
    general," you parent the ones you have. I'd think you'd want to find
    out what those specific kids are interested in, and the way to do that
    is to show each of them, boy or girl, as many things as you can. Once
    each child has begun to demonstrate spheres of interest and ability,
    maybe you'd want to try emphasizing skills that fit those spheres; the
    kid who's good with tools gets more and better ones, the kid who's good
    with paints or pots'n'pans gets more of those, etc. But I'd really like
    to see all kids get to choose from a complete range of skills and
    activities, rather than having the set pre-selected for them on the
    basis of sex.
    
    That said, I think I'll buy my nephew a makeup kit *and* a hammer-
    and-pegs bench. (He's 2. This will just make my sister's day!)
    
    -b

    I still believe (regardless of who is selected as role model
    identification) that absence of the same gender parent is of more
    consequence than absence of opposite gender parent.
    Which I suppose COULD be interpreted to mean that boys typically have
    it tougher than girls. (sort of what Robert Bly has been quoted as
    saying as well, isn't it?)

    Marv,
    
    Regarding your note about your son & his problems (ie. throwing up,
    nervousness, etc).  All of these "problems" are not the fault of your
    wife.  There are probably many reasons why your son is like this.  It
    may be the way his natural father treated him (emotional/verbal abuse),
    it may be due to his feelings from the divorce of his parents, it may
    be due to the way he was treated by other men in his life (ie. mothers
    boyfriends, teachers, etc).  I would try to get him into some sort of
    therapy (NOTE: Therapy is GOOD, not BAD for a person).  There may be
    something going on in your son's life that you are not aware of --
    maybe something from the past??
    
    Personally, I do think it is better for children to be raised in a nice
    loving household with two parents, but that is not always the case.  In
    the 40's, 50's, 60's and most of the 70's all children were primarily
    raised by their mothers, due to the fact that there were not as many
    women in the workplace as there are now, and fathers did not take an
    active role in raising their children as they do now.  Alot of children
    grew up with married parents, but one parent (usually the father) was
    rarely around.  
    
    I have known many men who were raised by single-mothers and they have
    turned out just fine.  You must remember that it isn't the fact that a
    man is raised by a single parent that would make him "Different" it is
    the way in which the boy is raised --- if he is raised in a
    dysfunctional environment, then he will be "Different". 
    
    You mentioned that a boy raised by a single parent does not know how to
    to use tools, how to mow a lawn, etc., but only knows how to do
    "feminine" types of things.  That is not always the case --- if the
    parent raising the child (the mother in this case) does not have that
    sort of skill (ie. was never taught those skills) then how could that
    child learn those skills.   I am a single parent, raising a daughter,
    and my daughter (6 years old) is already planning on mowing the lawn
    when she gets older -- she watches me do it, so she wants to do it. 
    She also has watched me build furniture (The type you buy in the store
    with "some assembly required), fix leaky faucets, fix a clogged drain,
    change the headlight in my car, put together a lawn mower, put together
    her bike, etc.  I know these skills, because I was taught these when I
    was a child and not by my father --- by my single-parent mother.  I was
    taught to be self-sufficient.
    
    It all comes down to the fact that it does not matter whether or not
    the child is raised in a single parent household it all depends on the
    environment the child is raised in (ie. happy, angry, violent,
    dysfunctional, etc), and what type of environment the parent was raised
    in ---- If the parent was raised in a dysfunctional environment, and
    does not recognize and try to change that (usually with therapy), then
    the children will probably be raised the same way . . . .
    
    Just my 2 cents . . . .
    
    Debby
            
    
    

    <All of these "problems" are not the fault of your wife.
    
    How do you know that?
    
    				herb