BC girls murdered on Christmas /custody dispute

Status
Not open for further replies.
Challenge accepted



Sexist pig


Lmao. No need to chop up her sentences to prove she is a sexist pig. You can take her entire sentences and just point to her very well thought out wording to point out her thought process and state of mind.

The fact that she get's defensive doesn't convince me in any other ways either.
 
Anyway, You have completely forgotten the background context. The original statement made by Rioe was:
Iit's going to take teaching boys parenting skills from childhood and encouraging them to have deep friendships beyond their family so they have a support network in adulthood.
My question was, and why is that something we only need to teach boys and not girls and whether it was a skewed mindset we (or rather some people) have of men as a society .

Of course all children should be taught these things. Right now though, it's something most girls are already taught from an early age, with the aforementioned dolls and babysitting and deep supportive friendships, while most boys aren't.

We do a pretty good job now of encouraging girls into STEM, but there is still not an equivalent system that encourages boys into nurturing. In fact, when we try, people complain that feminism is turning men into betas, etc. Society is far from finished making things equal for everybody, and men suffer for it in family law.

I feel like I've taken the original thread way off track, by speculating that it was this lack of teaching that was part of the background of this man's terrible actions. Maybe mods could branch it off into another thread.
 
Lmao. No need to chop up her sentences to prove she is a sexist pig. You can take her entire sentences and just point to her very well thought out wording to point out her thought process and state of mind.

The fact that she get's defensive doesn't convince me in any other ways either.

I am a sexist pig? As one of the biggest defenders and supporters of equal parenting for men, you have clearly never read any of my posts and have no idea who i am. Twisting what someone says and means to suit your agenda does not make them into what you are attempting to portray.
It simply means you only read what you ate looking for and skip the actual point.

When you run out of reasonable thought to debate and need to resort to spin, name calling and defamation of character, you can consider your argument a complete loss.
 
Of course all children should be taught these things. Right now though, it's something most girls are already taught from an early age, with the aforementioned dolls and babysitting and deep supportive friendships, while most boys aren't.

We do a pretty good job now of encouraging girls into STEM, but there is still not an equivalent system that encourages boys into nurturing.

But then again, how are we not teaching these things to boys when they have pets that they look after and nurture ? Or younger brothers and sisters (siblings) or even step brothers and step sisters ? Little action figures and teddy bears ?

Doesn't matter - you've made your opinion very bold and clear. Women and mom's are more nurturing then are farthers and men.
 
I am a sexist pig? As one of the biggest defenders and supporters of equal parenting for men, you have clearly never read any of my posts and have no idea who i am. Twisting what someone says and means to suit your agenda does not make them into what you are attempting to portray.
It simply means you only read what you ate looking for and skip the actual point.

When you run out of reasonable thought to debate and need to resort to spin, name calling and defamation of character, you can consider your argument a complete loss.

Ah.... Getting defensive again I see...

I did not call you a sexist pig -- Janus did. And I just said he wouldn't have to do that to prove his point. There are other ways in which he could do it.

It wasn't you who said something about taking things out of context and putting words in people's mouth a little earlier on now was it ?
 
by speculating that it was this lack of teaching that was part of the background of this man's terrible actions. Maybe mods could branch it off into another thread.

Speculating is the right word. There is no evidence that there was suck lack of teaching, or that playing with dolls as a child makes you a better parent. I am sure the women who killed their kids played with dolls as kids too. May have even poked needles in their dolls.
 
But then again, how are we not teaching these things to boys when they have pets that they look after and nurture ? Or younger brothers and sisters (siblings) or even step brothers and step sisters ? Little action figures and teddy bears ?

Doesn't matter - you've made your opinion very bold and clear. Women and mom's are more nurturing then are farthers and men.

I'm getting the impression you are deliberately not seeing my point. All I've ever said is that women are presently given a big head start on learning nurturing skills as girls, while men are held back as boys. This results in women, on average, being more nurturing than men. I have never said that this is right, or set in stone, and I'm actually a big fan of changing it.

Men can be wonderful nurturers (just as some women are crap at it!) but society has to not only teach them the skills, we also have to teach them to value learning them.

I'm glad you're so adamant though, and that you don't see some of what I've seen. It means you're on the forefront of the revolution.

Honestly, I've always thought there should be a training and licensing program of some sort before people should be allowed to be parents. It takes years of lessons and practice and big tests before we let people drive cars, and yet when they have a baby, we just congratulate them and wish them luck.
 
I'm getting the impression you are deliberately not seeing my point. All I've ever said is that women are presently given a big head start on learning nurturing skills as girls, while men are held back as boys. This results in women, on average, being more nurturing than men. I have never said that this is right, or set in stone, and I'm actually a big fan of changing it.

How exactly are women given a heard start on learning nurturing skills as girls ? I know you have stated that your theory isn't actually right or set in stone - and that you want to change it - but your quote below contradicts your statement.


Men can be wonderful nurturers (just as some women are crap at it!) but society has to not only teach them the skills, we also have to teach them to value learning them.

What draws you to the conclusion that society only teaches women nurturing skills and not men. And further, what draws you to the conclusion that we have to teach men to value learning nurturing skills ? What draws you to the conclusion that man don't value learning nurturing skills ?

Honestly, I've always thought there should be a training and licensing program of some sort before people should be allowed to be parents. It takes years of lessons and practice and big tests before we let people drive cars, and yet when they have a baby, we just congratulate them and wish them luck.

yes - because playing with dolls doesn't teach those skills. Glad you are able to finally agree with me on that point.


I think feminist theory could do much toward exploding the myth that parenting is a sex-linked trait
 
Yes, my very early on point that he is purposely missing the point in order to twist what is actually said. But that's his MO.

I agree with you and Rioe to an extend. I precisely disagree that we need to teach men as boys nurturing skills so that we can be as competent parents as women.

Here is some good reading for you two.

A French study published earlier this year found that fathers are able to recognize whether a crying baby is their child as reliably as mothers can. A recent study out of Israel found that men’s brains rewire for parenting just as much as women’s do when a new baby is born — a finding that challenges the long-held, cross-cultural assumption that women are biologically primed to be better parents. “Maternal instinct,” researchers say, is not innate, but socially constructed, an idea built around the post-Industrial age expectation that women should stay home with the children and keep house.

In fact, there is growing consensus among scientists and academics alike that affirms, yes, fathers do make good mothers. But in a society still defined by gender, do dads — and even moms — believe they’re just as suited to the task?

“Men definitely have this human capacity to connect with, respond to, and deeply nurture children of all ages,” said Andrea Doucet, the Canada Research Chair in Gender, Work and Care at Brock University, who has studied stay-at-home fathers for 20 years.

“What has been slower [are] the social judgements that men can in fact do this, especially with infants.”
 
I agree with you and Rioe to an extend. I precisely disagree that we need to teach men as boys nurturing skills so that we can be as competent parents as women.

Here is some good reading for you two.
A French study published earlier this year found that fathers are able to recognize whether a crying baby is their child as reliably as mothers can. A recent study out of Israel found that men’s brains rewire for parenting just as much as women’s do when a new baby is born — a finding that challenges the long-held, cross-cultural assumption that women are biologically primed to be better parents. “Maternal instinct,” researchers say, is not innate, but socially constructed, an idea built around the post-Industrial age expectation that women should stay home with the children and keep house.

In fact, there is growing consensus among scientists and academics alike that affirms, yes, fathers do make good mothers. But in a society still defined by gender, do dads — and even moms — believe they’re just as suited to the task?

“Men definitely have this human capacity to connect with, respond to, and deeply nurture children of all ages,” said Andrea Doucet, the Canada Research Chair in Gender, Work and Care at Brock University, who has studied stay-at-home fathers for 20 years.

“What has been slower [are] the social judgements that men can in fact do this, especially with infants.”

But even your bit here supports what I'm saying; that all genders are equally capable of learning good parenting/nurturing skills, however men are held back by social judgment that begins when they are boys, the idea that maternal instinct is socially constructed, etc.

That social construction and judgment begins with giving girls dolls and encouraging them to play house and nurture, and giving boys action figures and encouraging them to be competitive and aggressive. We've gotten to the point that girls who want to be competitive and aggressive are encouraged, but we are lagging horribly at encouraging boys who want to be nurturing.

I'd say your pet theory (by which I mean theory about pets, lol) is a great way to sneak in nurturing training for boys in a socially acceptable way. But we still need to broaden what is socially acceptable. I think it's going to be a long time before we have equal numbers of men and women in daycare providing professions, for example.

I believe it's going to be a generational thing. We may be doing better with the current generation of boys, but the man that started this whole issue is from a previous one.
 
But even your bit here supports what I'm saying; that all genders are equally capable of learning good parenting/nurturing skills, however men are held back by social judgment that begins when they are boys, the idea that maternal instinct is socially constructed, etc.


Well, let me begin by stating that I have read the article you have based your post on. Men aren't "held back" - they are still as capable as women are.

That social construction and judgment begins with giving girls dolls and encouraging them to play house and nurture, and giving boys action figures and encouraging them to be competitive and aggressive. We've gotten to the point that girls who want to be competitive and aggressive are encouraged, but we are lagging horribly at encouraging boys who want to be nurturing.

That is not how the social construction is begun. And that is not something we are doing by the very specific and differentiating toys we are giving to boys and girls. The article clearly states that :

One reason we might think that women are more compassionate than men is that we think of compassion in only one way: nurturance, kindness, softness, gentleness, and emotional warmth. We think of compassion in mostly feminized terms. It may be that women are conditioned to think of compassion as involving caring and nurturing and that, for men, it takes on a fiercer more protective appearance. From the author's work with veterans and active-duty personnel, she has seen deep expressions of compassion that do not have nurturing and maternal features. Think of the many heroic acts that happen daily in which people throw themselves into dangerous situations to help others. These are fierce, courageous and even aggressive forms of compassion.

I believe it's going to be a generational thing. We may be doing better with the current generation of boys, but the man that started this whole issue is from a previous one

it's a bit of a generational thing (which I will get into further below) but more so of a generalization thing.

Generalizations are generally never accurate. We often all engage in both nurturing and fierce expressions of compassion. Think of a mother who yells and roughly pulls her child away from oncoming traffic (fierce compassion) or military service-members who hold each other in grief after the loss of a friend (nurturing compassion). Love, compassion, kindness are natural to all of us in their varied forms of expression.

Rather than asking whether men or women are kinder or compassionate, the question should rather be: What are the myriad beautiful forms in which compassion expresses itself?


I'd say your pet theory (by which I mean theory about pets, lol) is a great way to sneak in nurturing training for boys in a socially acceptable way. But we still need to broaden what is socially acceptable. I think it's going to be a long time before we have equal numbers of men and women in daycare providing professions, for example.

I think this is where we are clashing heads. In the past, women stayed home and men worked. The law used to be that men would automatically get custody. However, feminists, changed that, and women were also able to get custody then. With women mostly staying home and men working, it made sense for women to have custody - they were with kids home full time anyhow. Society changed, and more and more women worked and stayed away from their kids. As Jusdge McDERMOT J. stated on Fraser v Fraser, 2015 ONSC 4640 (CanLII)

shared custody is becoming increasingly frequent, especially in light of the fact that in today’s world both parents often work and equally share care of the children.

So, the original social mindset and norm that women would stay at home and look after the kids, is how it started - not with the playing of the dolls as kids.

You have still not provided any researched evidence that girls playing with dolls teaches them nurturing skills - or that it makes them better parents according to society - if it does so then why do we have women taking parenting classes as adults?

No need to "sneak " in nurturing skills to boys. Aside from pets, Boys can also have younger siblings who they look after. but once again, carefully re-read the quotes about compassion.

More women being in daycare and a social norm stems from the outdated conception that women stay at home and take care of kids - while men go out and work IMHO. This does not automatically translate to society believing that women are more nurturing than men. There are a lot of single moms who are putting their children in daycare. So while there are more women than there are men who are in the profession of looking after kids -the irony is that the customers ( a.k.a. the "moms" ) are clearly away from home and working - and not with their kids.

:D
 
Let me try to come at this differently. Men and women are both perfectly capable of being good parents/nurturers. Why is it that more men than women are seemingly disinterested in doing so?
 
Being a father isn't easy either - especially after separation.

a sizable share of fathers (20%) say the main reason they spend too little time with their children is that they don’t live with them full-time

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013...ads-converge-as-they-balance-work-and-family/

Permit me to quote from the Report of the Special Joint Senate Commons Committee on Child Custody and Access [For the Sake of the Children, December 1998]. Toronto lawyer Michael Day is quoted at page 15:

When I go to court with a male client who is looking for custody, it's always an uphill battle. I always have to have a special fact situation in order to have a good chance at getting custody.

Toronto psychologist and custody assessor, Dr. Marty McKay testified [page 16]:

My finding is that there are a lot of nurturing fathers out there. I've had some women tell me they don't care how the assessment turns out because they are going to get custody of the children anyway "because they always give custody to the woman".

The Report itself noted some of the more recent statistics from Statistics Canada [page 4]:

"[M]ost children (86%) lived with their mother after separation. Only 7% lived with their father, about 6% lived under a joint custody arrangement, and the remaining (less than 1%) lived under another type of custody agreement."

These percentages are consistent with a 1989 study conducted for the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on Gender Bias [Gender Bias Study of the Court System in Massachusetts (1989) reprinted in 24 New. Eng. L. Rev. 745 and cited in Cynthia A. McNeely: Lagging Behind the Times: Parenthood, Custody and Gender Bias in the Family Court, 25 Florida State University Law Review 891 (Summer 1998)]. A proper interpretation of the data revealed the following analysis:

Mothers get primary residential custody 93.4% of the time in divorces.
Fathers in divorce get primary residential custody only 2.5% of the time.
Fathers in divorce get joint physical custody only 4% of the time.
Fathers in divorce get primary or joint physical custody less than 7% of the time.
Where fathers actively seek custody, they receive primary residency in less than one out of three cases (29%), and joint physical residency in less than half (46%).

Is it that more men are disinterested in parenting, or that women, the courts, and social workers are disinterested in allowing men to parent ?
 
Maybe it's because the men need to remain productive at work in order to support the major percentage of the costs of two households.

I was lucky that that wasn't a concern as status quo was established (while she saw her BF in a different city every second week) and could be changed once she figured out that she could get even more money if she had them full-time. Lawyers closed her request down real quick.
 
Is it that more men are disinterested in parenting, or that women, the courts, and social workers are disinterested in allowing men to parent ?

Honestly and its just my opinion is that the courts, Judges, social workers etc are overrun and clogged with Dads not taking responsibility mostly because of the burden of both and/or parenting and paying child support. So there is a pre judgement there. I have been reading this forum for over a year now, and feel in the bigger pictures it represents a small percentage of Dad's that vent here that the system is unfair (and I agree). But in reality the majority of case before the courts (aside from asset splitting) have to do with delinquent and/or disinterested Dad's. How many Dads to you think would come here and vent they dont want the responsibility of parenting or would admit they dont want to financially support there children? They arent represented here on this forum imo. Yet that is the majority of what I am learning happens in court according to my lawyer at least.

In this day and age, 50/50 should be mandatory, but why isnt it? I naively thought it was before I seperated. Why hasnt there been a movement to change it? Imo its because the majority of Dad's must not want it. The ones that have it, both parents were on the same page and it didnt get to court. The ones that want it, line up with the delinquent Dads and have to fight tooth and nail for it. So your kinda screwed from your own brothers so to speak.

I think the problem Dad's have is they face an uphill battle because their a minority from the majority of Dad's in court that have checked out of family life and the Mom's are left doing all the parenting and the public is left with the bill though welfare and Legal Aid. Check out articles of how much arrears are in Ontario alone via FRO, which show lots of parents simply cant or wont pay child support the majority being Dads.

Our posts are a reflection of our own experiences, your most likely dealing with an ex that doesnt support shared parenting and I am dealing with an ex that wont pay child support or share parenting responsibilities. So our views and opinions would be different on how we see things.
 
Honestly and its just my opinion is that the courts, Judges, social workers etc are overrun and clogged with Dads not taking responsibility mostly because of the burden of both and/or parenting and paying child support. So there is a pre judgement there.

Your opinion is slightly off a little. Maybe take another view at this...

Maybe the courts are overrun and clogged with mothers demanding more than they should be entitled to and not taking on the financial burden as they should. Its a proven fact that when societies are taxed over 50% of their income, society revolts. Vote another Liberal government in just one more term and everyone will see this fact come true. So to see a man revolt and refuse to pay more than their able to....sure I support every single deadbeat dad out there.

However, to have a woman refuse to work more than she wants to and be subsidize by a single man that has no choice in the matter is called a deadbeat mother. And there are way more deadbeat mother in this country than deadbeat dads. And that is a fact. So I would rather look at your opinion as incorrect. The truth is more deadbeat mothers are clogging up the system, powered by hunger lawyers willing to feed them with any BS to get another meeting, conference call or court date.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top