The role of the father has been downgraded

Fathers play major role in their children lives and the number of stay at home dads is growing yet media and family court is severely gender bias towards women.

Too true

While I do like the video, I do not see how it applies to our conversation other then the line "people should not be pre-judged by statistics of particular groups that they belong to" though I'm sure the only reason you included this at all is because you asked for statistics, sure that I wouldn't be able to find anything relevant, and when you realized I wasn't pulling this out of my ass, well you had to do something, I understand. The fact is that all the men who do a share of the housework are not enough to make up for the men who do not. It's actually kind of funny that you try to discount my stats because some are "over ten years old" when I also included studies from '06 and '07, and by my reckoning, that's pretty damn new, at least compared to this video which was made in '03 and didn't include any stats or any foundation of fact for his assumption that statistics are sometimes questionable, hell, global warming has stats for and against it's existence, but in the arena of housework, all the stats agree, women do more then men. Yes, I agree that people should be judged as individuals and not by group, but this isn't a dating site. There's nothing to compel me to treat you as anything other than a another number, I don't know anything about you until you make a comment, and when you make a comment, I judge you on what you give me. If you don't like that, go to E-Harmony. Someone's sure to be nicer to you there.

In the meantime you could try to do something other than fart around with semantics, and try some other approach to debate, because calling someone's bluff only works for you if someone is actually bluffing. And when it backfires, you could find some other argument besides telling someone the things you asked for don't count. Maybe you could do some research of you're own and if you find 2 more studies in your favor than I can find, I'll concede.

“In the arena of housework, all the stats agree, women do more than men” This is the only fanny thing I found out of the whole paragraph. That statistic is so wrong; I did not bother to answer, and thou I agree with the statistic that men are more abused than women because in my own experience it is what I always have seen. ChunkyCheezes was very eloquent on his description of the women’s work but he failed to clarify that 80% of the housework women do is watch TV and gossip. I imagine him praying for a divorce to have a date with you.

are you that indoctrinated to think that my response to you was asking you out on a date!? is that my only intention because I am a male?? the video is completely relative because you are the one drawing lines on statistics that have no real basis in reality, and anyone or anything that goes against your preconceptions must be a "wild card".....hence the fact that we are not blank slates, but we are pushing beyond the societal norms that we were bound to by our environemnt....... i do feel sorry that you cannot make relative correlations when it comes to macro-sociology, I may have overestimated your ability to understand such things..... I had asked for more specific information because you were very vague, and still you had not given any direct info on the studies or the study bases....

No, I do not think you were asking me out on a date, but you seem to expect me to give you the benefit of the doubt when I have no reason to. I'm not talking about how our brains are programmed because that would just lead the conversation to a "nature vs nurture" debate that would never end or could even be proven, but if you really believe the statement "socially there were necessary roles in early human life that were based on abilities and in turn became gender related." Then why would you follow it with the statement "[there's] much ignorance for the contributions of both genders throughout human history. (the past even hundred years or so do not even touch the overall history of our species)." You've made my point for me by contradicting yourself. There's no real evidence to support the "caveman" mentality that many men think is the social norm for men, in fact there's plenty of evidence suggesting that women were just as involved with hunting as men, many bodies of females that have been buried with bows, nets, and traps would indicate that women were dedicated hunters as well as men. Or the Amazons who were so dedicated that they would cut off one of their breasts to better draw their bows. I hope you realize you didn't fool me with the statement "We as a species no longer are limited by our physical capabilities" when you mean to say "women are no longer limited by our physical capabilities." But I do wonder at your statement "Perpetrating this divicive ideal will only perptrate the additudes you claim to be against." How am I perpetuating this divisive? By putting forth a collection of studies? By attempting to dispel the ignorance around the division of household chores between genders? How is that like claiming "we are not blank slates, but we are pushing beyond the societal norms that we were bound to by our environemnt"? "That we are bound to by our environment" my ass!! You my friend have been reading way too much John Gray (who got his PHD from a correspondent course I might add). There is no scientific fact in your video, and he may be just as ignorant as any one of the professors conducting the studies I included, and in all likelihood, more so considering one I included was conducted by the UK. But you still have not given any fact to support your position, and when you do, I will go through hours of research to collect info on the studies and study bases. Do you realize how weak you are to rely on the credibility (or lack there of) of my studies, when you don't have a single one on your side? You asked first, if you wanted to keep this a theoretical debate, you shouldn't have moved it to the realm of fact. And do try to stick to arguable facts, because as I said before, there will be no end to a discussion involving the nature vs nurture aspect of this. Just keep it to "dads doing their share" or something like that.

Oh, pooooooooooor brotherlelo. You're soooo pooooooor! Getting beat up by little girls in the schoolyard are you? So where are your statistics, huh buddy? What is your source that would list watching TV under the realm of housework? Hmmm? If you want someone to hold your hand the next time you go to school, you should ask an adult that you trust and I'm sure those girls will leave you alone in a few years after you hit your growth. You poor wittle thing!

Just because early man was under economic pressures to default to the binary gender roles of men and women doesn't mean it's natural, inherent, proper, or anything of the sort. Especially when we aren't remotely under the same economic conditions we were when we were all slaving day to night to produce enough sustenance to keep alive, as it was in pastoral and early agricultural societies. There are very few things that only men or women can do exclusively, with a gap that's closing more and more everyday, if it can be argued to exist. There's no more need to be a proper man or woman.

And if past cultural examples have to be used, then there's always the example of matriarchal Native American societies, in which biological fathers had no dominion over their children at all. Young boys were taught how to occupy the male role by their mother's brother(s), or, if he didn't like his family, he could choose to be raised by any other household, including ones made of two biologically male adults, in which one occupies the position of a third gender, most often titled 'twin-spirit'. But all of that still hinges on the assumption that the separate roles of men and women are necessary. I've never found a study with a shred of evidence to show that the children of single-parent households or same-sex households are any less well-adjusted than those of a husband and wife, as long as the children were properly supported. By caring parents.

But then I'm bias for somewhat radically supporting neutrality and androgyny.

In societies in which strict roles of men and women are still prevalent, studies show that children need one positive role model to reflect how to securely occupy their identity, not necessarily a mother or father. Or more specifically, a child that has an abusive parent has a higher chance of ending up well-adjusted (despite the poor role model and caretaker) if they have some positive model.

Actually, I lied. I'm not going to research the studies or study bases because the next thing you'll claim is that I cherry picked the results as to not discredit myself and I have a problem with doing your work for you. All the info you need to find further information on each study will be included in the study because I'm not so stupid that I would use a source that I couldn't check out. Quit being lazy, YOU'RE PROVING MY POINT AGAIN!!! This isn't housework and you still expect me to do it for you?!? C'mon you oaf!

OK, little girl. Thank you but I cannot give you that because I have never read a book, I can give you another thing better than that, my life experience seen trough my eyes and felt trough my heart and not somebody else opinion read in a books as facts.
I can give you another thing, same earnings if you perform as efficient and productive as I can but after a while you will go back home and start watching TV and gossip again because you can not handle hard work. It is hard for other men to compete with me as it is hard for me to compete with rookies younger mechanics but you are getting same paid anyway because the system is being tailored to your convenience so when you tighten that screw you will not break your fingernails. I do not want to hold your hand because I will see your destiny, I could see in your hands that girls can be as bad and evil as boys and even worse; Satan can control your mind better than the boy’s and you can became worse than boys. I do not have better choice of words but if your feelings are hurt I will lend my shoulder, (shoulder only nothing more) so you can drop some tears. The lake Michigan is getting dry so you can pour a river of tears there to fill it up a little bit while you wait for me to feel sorry for you but I will not anymore.

presumptuous and sexist to boot...... maybe you found the study base not as credable as you thought it would be?? so this is your response.... nice try at deflection, but sorry, that doesnt work with truly educated individuals.... to claim that you did no research on the studies in themselves is indacative that you yourself are not even aware of how they came to such conclusions, yet are ok with the conclusions as they are.... next thing you know youll be telling us ciggarettes are healthy because a scientist in the 80s said so lol.....

i spoke nothing of economic pressures towards males, it definately seems you did not grasp what i was saying at all since you are arguing for the points i was making....

im sorry, but your preconceptions are clouding your ability to see what i have written for what they are....

Dude, you're so full of shit. Not worth my time. Your opinion/experiences don't mean a thing when you're obviously biased and outright refuse to use reason.

first deflection, now projection.....

A truly educated individual would know how to use a search engine. An truly educated individual would know that you only question their opponents sources when you have no other option (which need I remind you, is how this conversation has gotten as far as it did). A truly educated individual would realize that to change the mind of another educated individual, facts are all powerful. An educated individual would realize when their opponent has made a valid point and would offer something other than semantics to defend their position. An educated person would not claim that their opponent is using the same tactics that said individual is using (deflection: where's you study? You keep focusing on mine to avoid conversing about the total lack of yours). Are you so presumptuous that you think you know me well enough to call me sexist after a few short exchanges? The fact that you did no research whatsoever is indicative of your stupidity. The fact that you can't do the work yourself is indicative of your own sexism. The fact that you contradicted yourself already without bothering to address it is indicative of your true level of education and of your trustworthiness. I'm not going to take what you say on faith, this isn't a synagogue. If you think you are clever just because you feel clever, then you are a lost cause and not worthy of my time.

You haven't written anything of value.

you have yet to even research the info you spout and you attack my intelligence!? lol.... maybe i already know of these things but wanted to see if you did... epic fail on your part.... if the value of my words are based on your ability to understand them, then i guess you are correct..... i just wanted to see if you could back up your claims, and its obvious you cannot do so without resorting to personal attacks.....

You don't have ANY research. You mistake a statement of fact for a personal attack. You're not holding back to test me. You have nothing, so you can't do anything other then express your doubt. I did the research to my own satisfaction and if you think that if you just wait long enough for my programming to kick in and eventually I'll be compelled to do your work for you, then anything I could think of to insult you with would be applicable, and thus not an insult at all. You disappoint me. I thought this was going to be a stimulating debate in which I would learn something new, you seemed to be so promising, but you're a broken record.

I haven't watched the video, but I like what you have to say, and I agree with it. I'm a fairly straight acting homosexual, my flame flairs at times, but my family has sort of always known somehow that I was gay. Even before I realized. I was taken to a psychologist at about the age of 3 or 4, due to concerns I was being sexually molested. One of the things that the psychologist said to my mother was, "Are you going to be prepared when this boy comes to you and says, 'I'm gay.'?" Looking back, I've always known, but didn't know how to deal with the feelings until I grew older. In kindergarten, I remember having a crush on the boy that sat beside me, and being at such a young age, I literally had no idea. I thought that it was wrong, and wondered why I was feeling that way, and the shame, embarrassment, and guilt, because that's not how my dad was. He didn't think other boys were cute, he thought my mom was. He talked about women, and such, as well as the rest of my older men role models. Lol, I was even given a black cabbage patch baby doll for Christmas by one of my similarly aged cousins. I grew up with them, and I think we had to have been about 6 or 7 at the time. Of course, my aunt was the one who paid for it, but it was my cousin that picked it out. I guess she just sort of knew, somehow, that I would like it, and play with it. My aunt went along with it. I did like it, and I did play with it. As I grew older, the rest of my cousins, uncles, and aunts started realizing that I was gay, before I really knew my self, and when I did know, I tried to hide it. But they knew all along, and I guess were just waiting for me to realize it on my own. Growing up how I did, with the above incidents, as well as others, I gradually came into my own, and I'm well adjusted sexually. I'm happy with that, and it's from the inclusiveness and acceptance I've always felt from my family. Things were just how they were, and they were ok. Playing with a baby doll didn't make me gay or effeminate, neither did anything else that happened when I was growing up. Some people just are, and some aren't. Same as being gay, some are and some aren't. I will never force gender roles onto my children. I'll let them flourish, and grow up to be who they are. To play how they feel is natural. I can only imagine what I'd be like had gender roles been forced onto me growing up. Therefore, I do not believe them to be detrimental to a child's development. It's very beneficial for them to be who they are, and just let it be. Haha, kind of like that old Beatles's song. It does more harm forcing conformity, and I wish more adults would realize that, perhaps collectively, we'd all be a little happier. I'm not sure how that relates to the comment that I'm replying to, but I think that it's important contribution.

Full of what? What a disappointment! I thought that I have found a classic sophisticated lady to walk to the park hand in hand and later go to the Mc Donald restaurant to eat a sword fish sandwiched. Oh well, never mind.

I Agree, “Kids just need role models that help them become strong independent individuals.” Children need a father and a mother. I never have a father, so nobody better than me knows what a need for a child a father is. I have to learn from my own experiences the hard way. If a man and a woman are not capable to raise a child, they should not have kids in the first place. For me a father is a role model who raises you until you can take care of yourself. When you are an adult you do not need a father anymore that is why one day when I was an adult, I extended my hand and stopped an estranger from hugging and telling me that he was my father. Father is an empty word for me. It is like you have a piece of your heart or an eye missing. I did not know how to be a father but my son is showing me every day how to be a father and I know for sure that I can do the role of a father 100% better than a woman does.

I can't include a link to a book. I could find another study, but for some reason, they're all biased, and pretty weak, only drawing from a study on small number of people and not very clear at all about what they discovered, offer little in the way of actual statistics. I could include a link to a review, but they don't give any numbers. But I'll try again.

An old one from Canada: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/studies-etudes/75-001/archive/e-pdf/68-eng.pdf
From the UK: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/lab_gen_div_of_hou-labor-gender-division-of-ho...&int=-1
http://thecoupleconnection.net/articles/housework--2

http://www.pobronson.com/factbook/pages/278.html
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070827174300.htm
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/28/woe-is-mom/

Is that good enough? It really wasn't all that hard, and more fulfilling then the laundry.

Bullshit! Women do not rear their own children anymore! They drop them off at a day care or send them to public school and let some stranger do the child rearing for them. W And then they go to work . When comes time to feed the kids you pick them up and take mcdonalds so then can shove face full of fast food. If the kids get home before bed time you let the kids get rasied by tv and video games. The house doesn't get that messy when nobody is at home accept at nightime to go to sleep.

So don't give me this slaving housewife over a stove bullshit of the 1950's.

I don't think you have your numbers right, but I am a father. I pay every bill in my house hold which is something I was raised that a man should do for his family (my wife works part-time). I share completely in the upbringing of our 4, 3 and 2 year old kids - yes, that means diapers, potty training, the works! I consider myself a great father. I think that more men need to take a step back and start being better husbands and dads in their homes and women can respect us as their equal partner, not just the other 50% provider.

Because men still have to bear the brunt of the family support and maintain their career while mom's look to get "equal pay" while on leave, and not working. You've quote a lot of statistics--Lord knows where you got them--but you don't currently have children and have no real idea what actually goes on once the children enter the picture.

Most men are not looking for extended vacation "paid leave" because they are dedicated to their careers. I don't expect a young liberal woman to understand that. It's all about milking the system for every benefit and additional day off, while telling each other that men don't really matter.

If you want to quote statistics, go out and look for yourself about the impacts on children in families without fathers. The article is correct: children without fathers are far more likely to do poorly in school and end up involved in crime.

And exactly how do youthink a woman--straight or lesbian--can raise a son and teach him to be a man?

I've seen the impacts on men when they don't have a father figure and women try to raise them. They turn out to be little wusses, taught constantly that it's "OK to cry", and it's "OK to play with dolls" and all that bullshit and they don't learn how to be MEN.

If you want to quote statistics, go out and look for yourself about the impacts on children in families without fathers. The article is correct: children without fathers are far more likely to do poorly in school and end up involved in crime.

So what about former President Bill Clinton or the current President--both of them grew up without fathers and seemed to do well for themselves as far as not being overly involved in crime and also it seems did fairly well in school.

And exactly how do you think a woman--straight or lesbian--can raise a son and teach him to be a man?

Normally I get mad and take offense when you call me an idiot or comment that something I said is ignorant or silly or stupid--but in this case I have to ask you--What the hell are you thinking with this comment?

Seriously that's like asking how does a father teach his daughter to be a woman?

(because I am guessing that is the core point MofT was trying to make--that society is too quick to kick the fathers--which means they have an equal chance of having a son and/or a daughter-- to the curb)

But somehow we got "off track" and started only caring about the impact of not having a father on MALE children and completely forgot that FEMALE children also exist--and are also growing up without a father figure in their lives.

And actually its FEMALES who are growing up without a father or a father figure that will then simply perpetuate the cycle you seem to be so angry about--which is these FEMALE children grow up to be mothers who don't have a clue how to raise a son to become a decent, upstanding, honest, respectful toward women - man.

(but then you sort of "wrestle your point" by insulting your own mother and by being completely ignorant of the fact that children OF BOTH GENDERS need their father or at least a positive male role model as they grow up.)

Unless of course I missed it and you were trying to be satirical and/or that you meant this as a rhetorical question/comment.

tsk tsk maybe where you are but not in my experience. My gf and I share the housework and plan on raising our child together.She will get paid leave for the next year while I work.It's all about sharing the work load. My father sat back after a days work and never helped with housework it's a different world now...shame on you :P

curtisreed... I've disagreed with you on another issue but not here . Well said, and absolutely true!

My statistics are the result of a meta-analysis that was the basis for a book written by Nancy Etcoff, who has a M.Ed. from Harvard, a Ph.D. in psychology from Boston University, and has held a post-doctoral fellowship in brain and cognitive sciences at MIT. Sure you may help to take care of your kids, but you may want to double check with your wife, and even then, you're only one man.

I didn't say anything about a stove, I said men aren't as involved as they think they are. I got this info from one of the best sources out there, a meta-analysis is a collection of studies that can be put together and boiled down. Until you offer me something more than a bigoted opinion, I say your just pissed because I called your gender lackadaisical concerning housework. Most stories that hint at this tendency for men to be sloth like at home get filled up with post claiming men aren't indentured servants, like cleaning up after yourself is such a big deal. Why don't you do some research before you post again. Your ignorance is not productive.

You don't expect me to know what it's like to be dedicated to a career? I'm fucking line cook. Do you know what kind of crap I have to deal with on a day to day basis just because I have a vagina? I'm telling you, I wouldn't be doing it if I wasn't dedicated. And if you were nine months pregnant and a soon to be single mother, what the fuck are you supposed to do, other than apply for welfare? Most of the mothers I know don't ask for any hand outs from the government, though they do need plenty of help from their families for a few months, but every single one of them rejoined the workforce as soon as possible. And just because you're a dick, it doesn't make you an expert on what a decent man really is, because I'll tell you buddy, you're way off the mark.

Hey, good for you, you share the housework, but it's probably because girls nowadays will not accept less from their mates, I know I sure as hell won't wait on some boy hand and foot, I've dumped several. These statistics aren't as old as your father.

And curtisreed is way out of line.

Bullshit! I've lived on my own as a home owner for years before settling down. House keeping is part of life just like cooking, laundry etc.I've met lazy ass women too who have no idea how to cook, do house work, and have dumped them because they have poor parenting skills. Incompetence and laziness is not inherent in just men!

I underestimate your knowledge and wisdom you really know what you are talking about.

can we have more details??... search engnines are only posting stuff from her dealing with beauty and happyness type studies.... at least within the first three pages of results lol....

It's more along the lines of mate selection.

I can't lend you my library but if you have access to one read
Geoffrey Miller (2000). The mating mind: How sexual choice shaped the evolution of human nature. New York: Doubleday.
John Alcock (2001). Animal behavior: An evolutionary approach (7th Ed.). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.
Malte Andersson (1994). Sexual selection. Princeton U. Press.
Laura Betzig (Ed.). (1997). Human nature: A critical reader. Oxford U. Press.
David Buss (1994). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating. New York: Basic Books.
David Buss (1999). Evolutionary psychology: The new science of mind. New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Helena Cronin (1991). The ant and the peacock: Altruism and sexual selection from Darwin to today. Cambridge U. Press.
Alan F. Dixson (1998). Primate sexuality: Comparative studies of the prosimians, monkeys, apes, and human beings. Oxford U. Press.
Nancy Etcoff (1999). Survival of the prettiest: The science of beauty. New York: Doubleday.
James L. Gould & Carol G. Gould (1997). Sexual selection. New York: Scientific American Library.
Richard E. Michod (1995). Eros and evolution: A natural philosophy of sex. New York: Addison-Wesley.
Anders P. Moller & John P. Swaddle. (1998). Asymmetry, developmental stability and evolution. Oxford U. Press.
Mark Ridley (2001). The cooperative gene: How Mendel’s demon explains the evolution of complex beings. New York: Free Press.
Matt Ridley (1993). The red queen: Sex and the evolution of human nature. New York: Viking.
Randy Thornhill & Craig T. Palmer. (2000). A natural history of rape: Biological bases of sexual coercion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Congrats, but you're still only one guy. Check the links I included in a reply to regjoeschmo at the top of the page. Not a single site I found claimed men did the same amount of housework as women. It's more equally distributed among younger couples, but after marriage, women gain 7 hours of housework per week and men spend an hour less. And income (male or female) has no affect on the amount of work men do at home.

"there can be 2 eggs to make an non reproductive female child and in that case both parents names would be female." actually whenever this is done the resulting zygote doesn't develope a placenta... the information needed to grow a placenta comes from the sperm and is 'suppressed' in eggs. therefore it will not develope into a human.

I was not aware of that info. Thanks for updating my knowledge!

here to spread some knowledge so we all can evolve a little faster...

My specialty is terminally/chronically ill. And some rehab with head injuries and other types of rehab. Most of my patients are over 50!

I'm a pharmasist, but my interest and passion is genetics. gerontology is fasinating, are you familiar with the work of audry degrey (spelling?)? he seems a little nutty but that's a trait that I think is common with people who are genius or passionate

He definitely fits the extreme brainiac category! The name sounded familiar but when I did some checking on him I had never actually seen him prior to today. I knew the idea was out there.
My grandmother was always involved in natural healing and preventative care. She was carrying on a family tradition passed on through our native heritage, and taking it to the next level. She was always trying to find the natural way to treat and/or prevent health problems. Many people asked for her care when they or a loved one was ill because she was such a loving, dear soul that her presence made one feel better and her touch was so reassuring even without any other assistance one felt improvement immediately.
My mother became an RN, as did I. I wanted to work with the older patients in helping them live their lives at home not in the hospital or a long term facility, before hospice made it's debut in this area.
I'll will definitely keep an eye on this Audrey Degrey and his ideas. Thank you for the info.