Schwarzenegger's propaganda

Phil #3 wrote:



and you are just a whiny loser, doesn't change the facts though.


True that whatever I say doesn't change the fact that you are a lying
sexual bigot.
Phil #3


Or the fact that you are a lying ****bag whose advice should be avoided
at all costs. Of course the facts in my first 2 posts (before you all
changed the subject to make this thread about me) are still unchallenged
except for a few weak attempts to put words in my mouth.

Bob W wrote:

"Such" role model has to be a man in order to be a male role model.


Not necessarily. There are some social science experts who conclude
teenage gang members become the surrogate male role models when fathers
are absent. IOW - The role models are boys who have yet to experience
any adult male situations.

I stand corrected, and those teenagers fall into the category of male
role models who prey on kids without male role models.

" wrote in message
...
Bob W wrote:

"Such" role model has to be a man in order to be a male role model.


Not necessarily. There are some social science experts who conclude
teenage gang members become the surrogate male role models when fathers
are absent. IOW - The role models are boys who have yet to experience any
adult male situations.

I stand corrected, and those teenagers fall into the category of male role
models who prey on kids without male role models.

Good. Now it's time to acknowledge 42% of all women believe one parent can
bring up a child as well as two parents. Nearly half of all women do not
think a biological father or father figure is necessary to effectively raise
children.

This statistic comes from the General Social Survey. To break it down
further 38% of white, non-Hispanic women agreed two parents are not
necessary compared to 64% of black women, 61% of Hispanic women, and 58% of
American Indian/Alaskan Native women.

When age is considered 66% of women 18-24 believe they don't need any
bio-fathers or male role models to raise children.

Your comments about men are not consistent with the social science research.
It's women who reject the male role model in raising their children.

Bob W wrote:


" wrote in message
...

Bob W wrote:


"Such" role model has to be a man in order to be a male role model.



Not necessarily. There are some social science experts who conclude
teenage gang members become the surrogate male role models when
fathers are absent. IOW - The role models are boys who have yet to
experience any adult male situations.


I stand corrected, and those teenagers fall into the category of male
role models who prey on kids without male role models.


Good. Now it's time to acknowledge 42% of all women believe one parent
can bring up a child as well as two parents. Nearly half of all women
do not think a biological father or father figure is necessary to
effectively raise children.


I haven't read that stat but I would think it is closer to 100% for men
and women. I am pretty sure I could have raised my kids better alone if
my wife was a welfare mother or a drunk. Since she isn't it was nice
doing it as a team. It is possible that those in the 42% feel that their
exes are a detriment rather than a help. I can certainly see how raising
a kid alone is easier than raising a kid with a shiftless loser.


This statistic comes from the General Social Survey. To break it down
further 38% of white, non-Hispanic women agreed two parents are not
necessary compared to 64% of black women, 61% of Hispanic women, and 58%
of American Indian/Alaskan Native women.


Makes perfect sense when you look at the fathers in welfare
neigborhoods, they are usually more trouble than help.

When age is considered 66% of women 18-24 believe they don't need any
bio-fathers or male role models to raise children.

Your comments about men are not consistent with the social science
research. It's women who reject the male role model in raising their
children.

What comments about men would those be? In this thread I said that boys
need and find male role models to emulate, and that it is very unlikely
that a boy would choose his mother as his role model. That set off
defensive rants from the worst role models around. It is nearly
impossible to "reject the male role model" when a boy is growing up,
they need them and they will usually find them. It can be a soccer coach
or a drug dealer, but they will find one.

" wrote in message
...
Bob W wrote:


" wrote in message
...

Bob W wrote:


"Such" role model has to be a man in order to be a male role model.



Not necessarily. There are some social science experts who conclude
teenage gang members become the surrogate male role models when fathers
are absent. IOW - The role models are boys who have yet to experience
any adult male situations.


I stand corrected, and those teenagers fall into the category of male
role models who prey on kids without male role models.


Good. Now it's time to acknowledge 42% of all women believe one parent
can bring up a child as well as two parents. Nearly half of all women do
not think a biological father or father figure is necessary to
effectively raise children.


I haven't read that stat but I would think it is closer to 100% for men
and women. I am pretty sure I could have raised my kids better alone if my
wife was a welfare mother or a drunk. Since she isn't it was nice doing it
as a team. It is possible that those in the 42% feel that their exes are a
detriment rather than a help. I can certainly see how raising a kid alone
is easier than raising a kid with a shiftless loser.

Another bad assumption on your part. "Thinking" about parenting situations
is not the same as FACTS. The 42% is a percentage of women not men and
women. The statisitc for men is 26% of men believe a man can raise a child
without the help of the other parent. IOW - Mne are less likely to believe
they can parent on their own.



This statistic comes from the General Social Survey. To break it down
further 38% of white, non-Hispanic women agreed two parents are not
necessary compared to 64% of black women, 61% of Hispanic women, and 58%
of American Indian/Alaskan Native women.


Makes perfect sense when you look at the fathers in welfare neigborhoods,
they are usually more trouble than help.

Nice spin! But the welfare neighborhoods are where the mothers have had
unwed pregnancies in huge numbers and don't believe a father was necessary
to raise their children so they pump out kid after kid with multiple
bio-fathers.


When age is considered 66% of women 18-24 believe they don't need any
bio-fathers or male role models to raise children.

Your comments about men are not consistent with the social science
research. It's women who reject the male role model in raising their
children.

What comments about men would those be? In this thread I said that boys
need and find male role models to emulate, and that it is very unlikely
that a boy would choose his mother as his role model. That set off
defensive rants from the worst role models around. It is nearly impossible
to "reject the male role model" when a boy is growing up, they need them
and they will usually find them. It can be a soccer coach or a drug
dealer, but they will find one.

I agree with your concept. But what you are failing to understand is the
void in these children's lives where there is no established male role model
is created by their mothers rejecting the need for male role models. My
point is the lack of male role models is due to mother attitudes rather than
father neglect. It is mothers' beliefs and behaviors that causes the search
for a substitute role model.

Bob W wrote:


Another bad assumption on your part. "Thinking" about parenting
situations is not the same as FACTS.

Okay then, it is a fact that I would have done better raising my kids
alone as opposed to raising them with a drunk mother. Thankfully I was
never forced to make that choice.

The 42% is a percentage of women
not men and women. The statisitc for men is 26% of men believe a man
can raise a child without the help of the other parent. IOW - Mne are
less likely to believe they can parent on their own.


Until they need to do it, they won't know. Age 0 - 3 would be nearly
impossible for a guy with a job, so I would answer no to that question
too. It would be a lot easier after age 5.



This statistic comes from the General Social Survey. To break it
down further 38% of white, non-Hispanic women agreed two parents are
not necessary compared to 64% of black women, 61% of Hispanic women,
and 58% of American Indian/Alaskan Native women.


Makes perfect sense when you look at the fathers in welfare
neigborhoods, they are usually more trouble than help.


Nice spin! But the welfare neighborhoods are where the mothers have had
unwed pregnancies in huge numbers and don't believe a father was
necessary to raise their children so they pump out kid after kid with
multiple bio-fathers.


Depends on the father, if the father is more trouble than help then the
mother is better off alone. Pretty simple really. Doesn't matter if the
woman pumps out 10 kids or 1. In some cases the biological father is a
drug dealer or a gang member so when the kid goes looking for a role
model he gets the whole package.


When age is considered 66% of women 18-24 believe they don't need any
bio-fathers or male role models to raise children.

Your comments about men are not consistent with the social science
research. It's women who reject the male role model in raising their
children.


What comments about men would those be? In this thread I said that
boys need and find male role models to emulate, and that it is very
unlikely that a boy would choose his mother as his role model. That
set off defensive rants from the worst role models around. It is
nearly impossible to "reject the male role model" when a boy is
growing up, they need them and they will usually find them. It can be
a soccer coach or a drug dealer, but they will find one.


I agree with your concept. But what you are failing to understand is
the void in these children's lives where there is no established male
role model is created by their mothers rejecting the need for male role
models. My point is the lack of male role models is due to mother
attitudes rather than father neglect. It is mothers' beliefs and
behaviors that causes the search for a substitute role model.

It can be both, it can also be that the male role model is a shiftless
loser and that results in the boys becoming shiftless losers. Even in
cases where women reject male role models, the kids want one, look for
one and usually find one. Plenty of boys seek out their fathers when
they need a role model even if it is against the wishes of the mother.
Others will go to a soccer coach or a car thief. I'm not trying to
establish blame, I don't care if people raise ****ed up kids. I am
merely pointing out to someone who claimed his kids were ****ed up that
boys emulate their male role models and rarely try to emulate their
mothers.

" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:


Apparently, I must have overlooked where he claimed that his children had
a male role model. Perhaps you might quote just what he said that leads
you to believe so.

He said .. "(raised by their mother who restriced my involvement)" Look up
restricted if you are still confused.

Since such restriction could be so much as allowing just ONE contact, then
technically you could deduce that they had a male role model. The common
understanding of a "role model", however, is one (especially when it
concerns a father figure) in which the student has continued, uninhibited,
regular contact; not some part time visitor.
By the way, in case you were not aware, overlooking something is NOT the
same as being confused. Look it up.


And showed his continued involvement with this "I've voiced my displeasure
with their actions"

That says nothing about any continued involvement.


If you've read his other posts you can see how he and his kids have a
decent relationship despite the efforts of his ex.


A CAREFUL review of my statements and yours will reveal that there is
absolutely NO relationship between the two.


Thats because you can't follow anything that doesn't agree with your
agenda. You've already made that obvious.

Whether or not I can't follow anything that doesn't agree with my so-called
"agenda" has no bearing on the fact that there is absolutely NO relationship
between the two groups of statements.

" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:


Wow, you guys are really pro- failure. You adopted the attitude that if
I am unhappy everyone in the world should be too. You are 100% wrong,
boys almost always behave the way they are taught by their male role
models, leaving a child without a male role model means he will have to
find his own role models, in most cases that role model will be a coach,
teacher, older brother etc. But in the worst cases the role model will
be a person who preys on young men without role models. When you read
about a teenage drug dealer or shooter how often is his mother in jail
for dealing drugs or shooting someone? Almost never. The male role model
is almost always the example.


I was making reference to principles, NOT role models.

Principles come from role models.

Such "role model", to use your term, being the mother.
To proclaim that one has to witness someone else committing a crime before
they are willing to do the same is absurd, to say the least.



Try to be realistic for 10 seconds, this is completely wrong and
ridiculous.


Then perhaps YOU can explain why the beat goes on.


I already did, if you leave your son without a role model he will find his
own male role model and you will have no say in the matter.

Not necessarily. Absolutely nothing says that any such "role model" MUST be
male. Again, the primary influence on a child is the mother.

Chris wrote:


" wrote in message
...

Chris wrote:



Apparently, I must have overlooked where he claimed that his children
had a male role model. Perhaps you might quote just what he said that
leads you to believe so.


He said .. "(raised by their mother who restriced my involvement)"
Look up restricted if you are still confused.


Since such restriction could be so much as allowing just ONE contact,
then technically you could deduce that they had a male role model. The
common understanding of a "role model", however, is one (especially when
it concerns a father figure) in which the student has continued,
uninhibited, regular contact; not some part time visitor.

It can be either, the boys usually decide who their role model is and
make it their business to be around him.

By the way, in case you were not aware, overlooking something is NOT the
same as being confused. Look it up.

Sometimes one leads to the other.



And showed his continued involvement with this "I've voiced my
displeasure with their actions"


That says nothing about any continued involvement.


No? then when and to whom is he voicing his displeasure?

Chris wrote:


" wrote in message
...

Chris wrote:



Wow, you guys are really pro- failure. You adopted the attitude that
if I am unhappy everyone in the world should be too. You are 100%
wrong, boys almost always behave the way they are taught by their
male role models, leaving a child without a male role model means he
will have to find his own role models, in most cases that role model
will be a coach, teacher, older brother etc. But in the worst cases
the role model will be a person who preys on young men without role
models. When you read about a teenage drug dealer or shooter how
often is his mother in jail for dealing drugs or shooting someone?
Almost never. The male role model is almost always the example.



I was making reference to principles, NOT role models.


Principles come from role models.


Such "role model", to use your term, being the mother.
To proclaim that one has to witness someone else committing a crime
before they are willing to do the same is absurd, to say the least.


"Such" role model is rarely if ever the mother, boys seek out and find
male role models close to 100% of the time. If the role model is a
criminal it is possible that the kid will emulate that, kids don't just
walk out of sunday school and start selling coke, they get indoctrinated
first. The same with a shiftless loser role model, the kids have to give
up hundreds of times before they become shiftless losers.



Try to be realistic for 10 seconds, this is completely wrong and
ridiculous.



Then perhaps YOU can explain why the beat goes on.


I already did, if you leave your son without a role model he will find
his own male role model and you will have no say in the matter.


Not necessarily. Absolutely nothing says that any such "role model" MUST
be male. Again, the primary influence on a child is the mother.


(Such)Male role models are always male, boys don't chose their moms to
be their male role model no matter how much influence she has on them.