Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

wbur.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 1001 posts

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#611

Post by saiya-jin »

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #582
jl6 wrote: post #11

> New research shows that when fathers are present and emotionally invested in children’s lives, they are more likely to develop a stronger sense of self-worth and excel in everything from school to relationships. Regardless of the debate on how tough (or not) love should be, the absent fathers issue seems like something concrete and impactful that we should be trying to address.

Though the statistics speak loudly enough, my anecdotal experience with a bit whose father abandoned him has been harrowing. It’s deeply disturbing to him. Even having a father figure step in to take care of him doesn’t fill that void or resolve much distress. It seems it will be a lifelong issue to some degree. I didn’t quite believe it at first. Over time it has become abundantly clear. Boys without dads, not even…

I agree, as a kid I just didn't think about that, but as an adult I see the epidemy all around me. Women without functional father figure have same deep scars that they struggle with for rest of their lives, and so do men. They just manifest very differently since each have their own needs from this father figure that were not met.

And its not just physically absent fathers, those working long hours constantly (under false premise of 'providing for my family'), or for some other messed up reasons are simply not there often enough, physically or emotionally, often cause all this.

Its a vicious circle too, people take this baggage with them into their own relationships which suffer then, and cycle repeats. Lack of trust, running away from solvable issues, sleeping around etc, I've seen it all and some more. Some of my relationships failed exactly due to women on the other side not being able to deal with exactly this baggage, to the point I gave up on trying to fix other people's lives, because you basically can't anyway.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#612

Post by cies »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #558
nicbou wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was not my experience. The message was bitterness, and there is a reason their lot is poorly perceived. Try /r/menslib for a healthier discussion that isn’t centred around blaming women for everything.

Sorry, any mention of "biological essentialism" is explicitly banned there. Unfortunately, a lot of biology is indeed objective essentialist. It's a terrible subreddit made for people who think that the solution to every problem that men face is to simply go read "Come as You Are" or some other shit from Bell Hooks.

So biology says tomato is a fruit. In the kitchen we consider it a vegetable.

Could the same be true for the whole gender discussion? That biology gets side-stepped in the name of common sense (that does not answer questions regarding toilets, sports competitions and mis-pronouning; but it would give us some space without totally invalidating biology)

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#613

Post by brandall10 »

bobsmooth wrote: post #601
brandall10 wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn’t experience this in my childhood in the 80s (I’m 47) in Los Angeles. The only shocking moment I had was taking a Women Studies course in my sophomore year of college… as I felt my childhood lacked this tension, it would be helpful to uncover blind spots. In particular I remember we had a 2 day discussion on the harmful impact of the Cosby Show on society (both race and gender relations) and the other male mem…

>the harmful impact of the Cosby Show Could you expand on this?

The basic thrust of the argument is that it was so successful because it made white America feel validated about low-key racism...as long as there's a certain level of success portrayed, as long as they act white, as long as the women are light skinned and pretty, etc. There is arguably some merit there. The tie-in to 3rd wave feminism as the conversation progressed went off course and is hazy.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#614

Post by cies »

Neil44 wrote: post #608
ineedasername wrote: post #95

This plays out at all levels. I felt extremely insulted just a few days ago when my youngest’s preschool held a gathering to celebrate their “graduation” to pre-school. At least 4 times mothers were called on to step forward— once to have a song sung to them, another to receive a flower, etc. Fathers were not mentioned at all. This prompted me to look around, get a rough sense of the distribution… Counting the kids &…

My daughter's teacher this year just straight blanks me at the parent consultations. Like, it's uncomfortable. Speaking to some other fathers it's not just me. But I am still undecided over whether it's worth complaining as her holding her hands up and saying mea culpa seems somewhat unlikely and I feel I would quickly become the bad guy.

> My daughter's teacher [...] it's not just me

Maybe it was just her though. I'd talk to the school director over this.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#615

Post by davidguetta »

aredox wrote: post #143
davidguetta wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> majority of the hetero/bi female dating pool selects in favour of features that are often red flags for toxic masculinity This is so insane. Anyone who's been enough a player of the dating game and treed to optimise your strategy known you will end up becoming or (in my case) pretending to be "toxic masculinity" because it work so much more on girls.

Maybe because you spend too much time with girls who are "players" on the dating "game". insert meme about selection bias here There's a whole world out there of fairly normal people who don't play those games. They are not in nightclubs. Try to live an actual life.

Experience tells me it's not true.

In general girls who don't go to nightclub are still going to respond to basically the same 'stimuli' / behavior than club girls. It's just in general they are less conscious of it and don't understand it, and sometime blame themseleves (when they are not just at the edge of depression) for despising their "nice" boyfriend and getting horny for the "toxic" guy.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#616

Post by te_chris »

A whole topic thread that seems to be navel gazing on various angles on culture war bollocks without actually talking about the parenting implications.

I’ve got a 7 month old boy, I’ve done everything I can to read up about how to be a good parent - obviously time and attention is not infinite, I’ve definitely missed stuff. The best I’ve seen is the stuff around Emotion Coaching. Give kids (note, non gendered) a safe, loving environment and act as teachers/guides to learning to be comfortable with their emotional selves and hopefully they’ll sort the rest out from the solid foundations you’ve given them to allow them to be in the world.

So much hair pulling pro anti feminism, Andrew Tate whatever itt and so little talk about the actual act of parenting.

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#617

Post by folli »

skinkestek wrote: post #501
antigonemerlin wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's exactly what my father did. He took parenting classes at the library, because he wanted to learn more and didn't think that just because he considered himself successful in business and life, he would necessarily understand pedagogy. To that, I am eternally grateful to him. It's very hard for people to swallow their pride and admit humility, to say "I don't know" and listen to the experts. I have an immense amou…

Also you were a bit lucky. Over the years there has been an insane amount of bad advise from "health specialists". I was born in a time when kids were supposed to sleep with their backs up and mothers were supposed to wash their nipples using antibacterial before breastfeeding...! Sometime before that there was a time (at least around here) were kids were supposed to eat sour cream porridge from early life. Of course…

I'm not at all disagreeing with you, but your examples also demonstrate that a lot of parental advice rely and reflect the era's zeitgeist.

How do we make sure that what you call 'correct advice' is not again a reflection of today's zeitgeist and 50 years from now will make fun of these suggestions in a similar way as of applying antibacterial before breastfeeding?

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#618

Post by brigandish »

stubybubs wrote: post #504
brigandish wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You're talking about gametes and OP and GP are talking about dimorphism, which is generally considered the difference in forms not including gametes . It's a very specific word to do with size differences, body hair etc. That is absolutely a bimodal distribution. Even just in height it is not binary. Sex does have several meanings, and form is one of them.

Sexually dimorphic. That was the phrase used, was it not?

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#619

Post by sharikous »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #53
jl6 wrote: post #11

> New research shows that when fathers are present and emotionally invested in children’s lives, they are more likely to develop a stronger sense of self-worth and excel in everything from school to relationships. Regardless of the debate on how tough (or not) love should be, the absent fathers issue seems like something concrete and impactful that we should be trying to address.

> absent fathers issue seems like something concrete and impactful There is a general corruption of the concept of masculinity in American culture. It’s similar to what’s happened to the symbol of the American flag, but more insidious. When I say masculinity, or masculine values, what do you think of? When you think of someone who values their masculinity, who do you perceive? Now do the same for femininity. Which mo…

> When I say masculinity, or masculine values, what do you think of? When you think of someone who values their masculinity, who do you perceive? Now do the same for femininity. Which model is healthier?

I really struggle to understand this question. Between masculinity and femininity is there one that is supposed to be obviously healthier?

If we go by what the marketing is pushing it's a toxic tarpit on both sides (see The Rules vs The Game).

Re: Ignoring boys' emotional needs fuels public health risks

#620

Post by jadamson »

nicbou wrote: post #513
Khaine wrote: post #470

What's interesting is that I recently watched The Red Pill Documentary. I recall when it was released that the director, Cassie Jaye a self professed feminist was pilloried absolutely everywhere for giving a voice to Mens Rights Activists. The actual documentary is quite milquetoast. What it is, is her engaging with the ideas around how in some ways men are disadvantaged in modern society. It's fascinating to me that…

That was not my experience. The message was bitterness, and there is a reason their lot is poorly perceived. Try /r/menslib for a healthier discussion that isn’t centred around blaming women for everything.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN