Preparing sibling for birth process?

On Apr 19, 7:00 pm, toto wrote:
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 12:45:07 -0700 (PDT), agsf_57
wrote:

That she rather have her child be raised and in company of strangers
than to sit down with the child and help her grow.

For most of human history, children were raised by the *tribe* rather
than by their individual mothers alone. Human families were extended
families and grandmothers, grandfathers, aunts, uncles and other
relatives helped to rear the children. It is really only in recent
times in the West that the nuclear family has become the *ideal.*

In the Kibbutzim in Isreal, communal child rearing is not seen as
inimical to strong family ties.

Underlying these child rearing practices is a different view of
children and childhood. In tribal and communal societies, the child
is views as a full participant in the life of the community from
birth.

--
Dorothy

That's nice and all, but you have to acknowledge that the two
societies are different. In these tribes, the entire tribes were
working together to survive and prosper. Each member had a role to
play in order to better the tribe. Also, I am sure that even in those
tribes, the mother of the child would prefer to be with their
offspring than to relinquish the parental duties and joys onto other
tribal members.

Regards...

In article ,
agsf_57 says...

On Apr 19, 1:33 pm, Banty wrote:
In article ,
agsf_57 says...





On Apr 19, 5:38 am, Banty wrote:
In article
,
says...

On Apr 14, 5:36 am, Banty wrote:
In article , toypup says...

wrote in message
...

I mean with the advent of air conditioned offices and careers in which
men and women can produce equal results, such as in computers. The
jobs of the past women did not want to do and they still do not want
to do jobs of physical labor. However, if there ever becomes a day
where a person can construct a building or home with a push of a
button, women will jump on that opportunity.

And why not? If a woman can do It as well as or better than a man and she
wants to do it, why not?

This air conditioned office thing is just plain silly. There are female
soldiers, female firefighters, female ironworkers, female atheletes. Never
mind
recent examples, we have Clara Barton working in hot battlefields, Jane
Goodall
working and living in jungles.

I guess he imagines it's the women shouldn't swe..., um, perspire.

It's the woman-on-pedestal thing. It's the old expectation that she be an
object of admiration for physical looks, while fulfilling a limited set of
roles. That's long been confused with 'respect'.

Banty

No, not at all. Women, even today, make up the minority of the jobs
you describe. Respect is dying and putting your life on the line for
your wife and children. A married woman covered in a burka in
Afghanistan has more respect and value than an unwed single mother in
America. However, from the American's point of view, she is oppressed.

And you don't even realize you just said this to an unwed single mother in
America huh.

Banty

Then you should have first hand experience of what I am saying. It's
you and your child. No one to help you in life. No one to put their
life on the line for you and your child. You were some guy's temporary
toilet. Your level of respect and value is the same as of that toilet.
You go girl!

Regards...

Bzzzzt!!

Wrong on all counts. You go to the back of the line.

Banty

Care to elaborate. Usually unwed single moms are alone raising a child
by their own means.

Regards...

I don't feel like hand-holding - so just compare with what you just said, with
what you said above.

Banty

On Apr 19, 2:37 pm, Beliavsky wrote:
On Apr 19, 7:40 am, Banty wrote:

Generally speaking, women like to stay home and men like to work
outside the home. It's a proven study.

Good - then you can give us a cite to that study.

A narrower generalization that has some support is that mothers prefer
not to work full time:

Agreed. A job to get them out of the house while the kids are in
school, yet a job not so important that if they lost their job, it
wouldn't be an issue.

Regards...

On Apr 20, 4:43 am, Banty wrote:
In article , toto says...





On 19 Apr 2008 14:43:00 -0700, Banty wrote:

In article ,
Beliavsky says...

On Apr 19, 7:40 am, Banty wrote:

Generally speaking, women like to stay home and men like to work
outside the home. It's a proven study.

Good - then you can give us a cite to that study.

A narrower generalization that has some support is that mothers prefer
not to work full time:

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/536/working-women

Fewer Mothers Prefer Full-time Work
From 1997 to 2007
July 12, 2007

In the span of the past decade, full-time work outside the home has
lost some of its appeal to mothers. This trend holds both for mothers
who have such jobs and those who don't.

Among working mothers with minor children (ages 17 and under), just
one-in-five (21%) say full-time work is the ideal situation for them,
down from the 32% who said this back in 1997, according to a new Pew
Research Center survey. Fully six-in-ten (up from 48% in 1997) of
today's working mothers say part-time work would be their ideal, and
another one-in-five (19%) say she would prefer not working at all
outside the home.

rest at site

Sure.

That would accord with what I have observed, and it makes sense, too - wanting
fewer employment hours at a time of life when there are other responsibilities
that don't accord with the normal full time employment hours.

OF course, honestly told a lot of people would like to *never* need full time
employment, if the question was asked the right way. Practicality being another
matter.

But as you point out it's very much narrower than what was asserted.

Banty

Also, I wonder how many men would like this privilege of working part
time if they could do it?

Yep. And if anyone is asked "would you like it if your marriage partner had or
made enough money so that you could have financial freedom", I think the most
common answer *would* be - "well - YEAH!".

I don't think the answer would be the same. As men, we take pride of
our accomplishments. To lounge around the house while our wives work
is not something we would cater to. I personally couldn't do it. There
is only so much we can fix around the house before we get bored.

agsf clearly had to go rummaging through internet to find his "proven study" and
didn't quite find it.

I did a 2 minute search and copied and pasted the first thing I found.
I mean, it's common knowledge and I am shocked it's being challenged.

Beliavski at least realized the narrow scopes of what he
could find.

That women want their cake and eat it too? Wow! Another shocker.

Banty

Regards...

"agsf_57" wrote in message
...

Usually in a patriarchal society, the older brother of the husband, or
the husband's father cares for the woman after the husband has died.

But in such a society, there can be a lot of resentment and the woman ends
up not being treated well. She must also be subservient to the IL's, acting
almost as a slave to the IL's. Also, if the IL's do not want to care for
her, she is left on the streets to fend for herself. In such a society, a
woman left to fend for herself cannot do very well.

wrote:

A married woman covered in a burka in
Afghanistan has more respect and value than an unwed single mother in
America.

While doing a bit of googling to find out what life is actually like for
women in Afghanistan these days, I came across
http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/wrd/afghan-women-2k2.htm. Must say it
didn't leave me terribly impressed with the level of respect and value
these women are getting. Single motherhood isn't a path I'd want to go
down, but to me it sounds vastly preferable than the life that's
described for Afghanistan women.


However, from the American's point of view, she is oppressed.

Yes. From
http://www.channel4.com/life/microsi...tan/women.html, it
sounds as though – even though life for women has improved post-Taliban
– many women still have their lives severely restricted by the threat of
violence. Is that not something you see as oppressive?


Sarah
--
http://www.goodenoughmummy.typepad.com

"That which can be destroyed by the truth, should be" - P. C. Hodgell

wrote:
On Apr 6, 1:45 pm, Sarah Vaughan wrote:

[...]
I meant that the traditional marriage model of one parent focusing on
the family while the other parent earning the living is a great model.

As the partner earning the living in such a model, I can certainly vouch
for the fact that it's great for me. I get to keep on doing the job I
love, without any worries about organising childcare or how my children
are coping. And I agree that it's great for my children that they can
be looked after full-time by their parents in the early years. However,
it's not so great for my husband. He's the one who's stuck at home with
a screaming baby and a three-year-old acting up, the one who's taken
years out of his career with no guarantee that he'll be able to get back
into it when our younger child is old enough for us to feel comfortable
about leaving her with a childminder.

Now, that's not to say that either of us has any regrets about choosing
to do things this way. We're both glad that our financial circumstances
are such that we have been able to manage to avoid daycare during the
early years. And there are practical reasons why this was the best way
to ensure our children got full-time parental care. But I don't know
that I'd call it 'great' in such a blanket, unqualified way. I think
that it can be great for some families. For others, it's the best of a
bunch of imperfect options. I do wish that we had some way of spreading
the impact of time out of work (in terms both of missing out on present
satisfaction and on future career options) so that it didn't fall so
disproportionately on one parent. If my husband's line of work had been
the kind of thing where part-time work was available, then that might
have been the ideal solution for us – we could both have worked
part-time and had different days at home with the children. I think
that's an even better model, in those occasional cases where it's
actually feasible. And there are all kinds of other ways of doing things.

Of course, sometimes there happens to be a perfect solution for an
individual family. For most families, though, it's a matter of finding
the one that has the fewest disadvantages for the family all round.
That's what I mean by saying that one-size solutions don't fit all.

What I see in America today is a couple has a baby and immediately
dumps the baby in daycare while they both pursue careers.

I think 'dumps' is the wrong word, as it suggests that all they want to
do is get rid of the baby, which is rarely the case. The abysmal
maternity leave options in your country do mean that many couples have
rather limited options.

It's the feminist doctrine that perverts and
attacks the marriage model.
shrug I don't think there's such a thing as *the* feminist doctrine.

It exists. It tells women that they are doormats, maids and human
slaves if they stay home and/or take care of their husbands and
children. It also tells women that they are inferior and taken
advantage of

That's *a* feminist doctrine, not *the* feminist doctrine. You're
making the common mistake of believing that the extremists in a movement
equate to the whole movement. 'Feminist' is too loose and vague a label
for any of the doctrines that fall under it to merit a definite article.

when in fact, the realty was that women had/have a better
life and were more respected and valuable prior to and after feminism.

In what way?

Feminism is a pretty loose and widespread set of beliefs (I know one
feminist who defined her own feminism beliefs simply as "the belief that
women are fully human"). I think there are beliefs on feminist,
anti-feminist, and couldn't-care-less-about-feminism sides that can
potentially pervert and attack marriage.

Know of any that can promote a healthy marriage?

Sure. A willingness to accept that there is more than one side to every
story and, no matter how clear-cut your grievances seem, it's important
to find out how things look to your partner and hear what they have to
say on the matter. A determination to show your appreciation for the
things your partner does – the little as well as the big - rather than
taking them for granted. A determination to prioritise your partner,
making time to find out what's going on in his or her life regardless of
what else is going on and taking up your attention. And an attitude
that the two of you are inn this together and will sort problems out as
a team.


Sarah
--
http://www.goodenoughmummy.typepad.com

"That which can be destroyed by the truth, should be" - P. C. Hodgell

"NL" wrote in message
...
agsf_57 schrieb:
On Apr 19, 5:38 am, Banty wrote:
snip
And you don't even realize you just said this to an unwed single mother
in
America huh.

Banty

Then you should have first hand experience of what I am saying. It's
you and your child. No one to help you in life. No one to put their
life on the line for you and your child. You were some guy's temporary
toilet. Your level of respect and value is the same as of that toilet.
You go girl!

Regards...


Have you ever heard the term widow?

Not agreeing with the troll, but technically speaking, you are not an unwed
single mother. You're a widow.

I'm sorry for your loss.

And can we now please stop feeding the troll?

cu
nicole

Yes, please. I blocked him ages ago, so only see the troll feeding posts,
not the original. I wish everyone would.
--

Jamie Clark

On Apr 20, 3:02 pm, Sarah Vaughan wrote:
wrote:
A married woman covered in a burka in
Afghanistan has more respect and value than an unwed single mother in
America.

While doing a bit of googling to find out what life is actually like for
women in Afghanistan these days, I came across
http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/wrd/afghan-women-2k2.htm. Must say it
didn't leave me terribly impressed with the level of respect and value
these women are getting. Single motherhood isn't a path I'd want to go
down, but to me it sounds vastly preferable than the life that's
described for Afghanistan women.

The women punished are those who go out of the scope of their society.
Remember, not only are the men inflicting the punishment, but so are
the women.

However, from the American's point of view, she is oppressed.

Yes. Fromhttp://www.channel4.com/life/microsites/A/afghanistan/women.html, it
sounds as though – even though life for women has improved post-Taliban
– many women still have their lives severely restricted by the threat of
violence. Is that not something you see as oppressive?

Wanting to divorce your husband to become a doctor is not improvement.
Becoming a westernized country is not improvement. Here is some food
for thought:
http://www.angryharry.com/eswerewome...dinthewest.htm

Sarah

Regards...

Jamie Clark schrieb:
"NL" wrote in message
...
agsf_57 schrieb:
On Apr 19, 5:38 am, Banty wrote:
snip
And you don't even realize you just said this to an unwed single mother
in
America huh.

Banty
Then you should have first hand experience of what I am saying. It's
you and your child. No one to help you in life. No one to put their
life on the line for you and your child. You were some guy's temporary
toilet. Your level of respect and value is the same as of that toilet.
You go girl!

Regards...

Have you ever heard the term widow?

Not agreeing with the troll, but technically speaking, you are not an unwed
single mother. You're a widow.

I'm sorry for your loss.

Eh no. I'm not a widow. I was just trying to say that jumping down
single mothers throats, calling them temporary toilet might not be such
a smart thing to do because generally single moms didn't turn into
single moms by waking up one day and deciding "hey, raising children on
my own, that's what I want to do with my life." for lots of us it wasn't
something we chose to do, it was something that happened.
It's just that somehow in most peoples minds single mothers are the root
of all evil and we must be... weeded out. And also, something must be
really wrong with us because we didn't manage to hang on to the father
of our child(ren). And we're really the ones to blame for the children
not growing up in a happy family. Well, I left because I was beaten,
kicked and verbally abused. I don't think that's a healthy
relationship/family to grow up in. I think being a single parent family
is much more healthy than a family where abuse happens regularly. But of
course I'm cheating my child out of a wonderful relationship with his
other parent... sure.


And can we now please stop feeding the troll?

cu
nicole

Yes, please. I blocked him ages ago, so only see the troll feeding posts,
not the original. I wish everyone would.

I did, too. But this just really struck me as something to speak up about..

cu
nicole