Stay-at-home dad • Hacker News Board

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#101

Post by gexla » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 10:57 PM UTC

enraged_camel wrote: post #50

The part about being viewed suspiciously at the playground was particularly awful. Why is it that we as a society are so fucking fearful? We have an irrational fear of communists, socialists, terrorists, serial killers, sex offenders, and of course, child molesters and abductors. Everyone thinks that there is someone out there who is out to hurt them and their family. Like, that is the default assumption , and people…

Think that's bad in a Western country? Try being a white guy taking your Filipina girlfriend's daughter to school or anywhere else. You're a white guy with a little girl in the country which is supposedly a destination for pedophiles.

I think it's all in his head though. He is probably projecting his fears of what people think about him. And why would you care what parents at a playground think of you anyways?

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#102

Post by Falling3 » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 10:59 PM UTC

lazyjones wrote: post #96

saraid216 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our society is built to promote fear. We're heavily, heavily individualistic and isolationist. Our cultural prime directive is, "Never again!"

I don't think it's society, especially when it's a society in a country that traditionally values freedom and individuals' rights. What is behind this new culture of fear is politics: fear is great for manipulating the masses, most effective when those who promote it can present themselves as a solution.

>What is behind this new culture of fear is politics: fear is great for manipulating the masses, most effective when those who promote it can present themselves as a solution.

I hear people from all walks of life make claims like this constantly. While I don't doubt that some use fear to purposefully manipulate us, I do not see it as the norm. The media doesn't care about controlling us. It cares about it's viewership. If fears sells, you can bet your ass they're going to scare the hell out of us. They don't care about dumbing us down, but if all we want to see is celebrity gossip, they're going to oblige.

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#103

Post by Tichy » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 11:03 PM UTC

I agree with his experiences, and there would be more to add. For example our baby-friend families usually were connected via my wife (from birth preparation classes for example), so it was a bit harder/more awkward for me to call them up to hang out so that our kids could play together. That's not active discrimination, just stuff that happens.

I wanted to throw some other thought to HN: I've come to the conclusion that we won't see a big surge in "stay-at-home-daddying". I have nothing against it, but ultimately I think the rationale would be "why would I pay my babysitter half of my salary" (which is what a stay at home dad is getting)? It seems to me a mother still has a bigger claim to her children because she invested much more physically, so society will deem it more acceptable if she does the stay-at-home thing, getting paid more than a mere babysitter.

Or will it become feasible in the future to speculate on becoming a stay-at-home dad? For example (extreme to make a point) instead of taking on another career, take classes in cooking and home decoration in the expectation to one day take care of a home? It seems very unlikely to me, although of course there will be (and already are) lots of women who have and want interesting careers. But would they go forth and marry a guy with no skills but home honing? Please spare me the sexism comments, I want to think rationally about this. (I personally don't care who stays at home). The point is that it is very viable to speculate on becoming a stay at home mother imo.

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#104

Post by hobs » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 11:07 PM UTC

karmajunkie wrote: post #83

adrianbye wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this doesn't happen in non feminist countries (ie usually 3rd world).

In other words, in countries where men make all the rules and run the show nobody dares look askance at a man in a public setting? Go figure.

Does that mean women are setting the rules in America?

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#105

Post by withad » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 11:09 PM UTC

adrianbye wrote: post #87

withad wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of societal differences between first and third world countries and they exist for a lot of reasons. I really don't see why you would pin this particular one, if it even exists, on feminism.

i know, feminism is a sacred cow. the truth is that men tend to be highly valued in the 3rd world. by comparison in the west they tend to kill themselves as they get older: http://www.prb.org/Articles/2006/ElderlyWhiteMenAfflictedbyH... are you aware we've blocked right wing research out of academia, so these issues never get researched properly? http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/08/science/08tier.html?_r=0 and that mar…

Yes, men do tend to be highly valued in some countries. And women in such countries tend to be treated as property. What does that have to do with suicide rates of men in the US? And what does any of it have to do with your original point about feminism somehow causing media scare stories?

It's unfortunate that politics can have such an influence on science and psychology and sociology are far from the only fields it happens in. But, again, that doesn't somehow prove feminism wrong or your original point correct.

Did you even read that link you provided about Margaret Mead? Freeman was accusing her mostly of incompetence (taking jokes/lies as fact is the main example) and Freeman's attacks on Mead's work have themselves been heavily criticised.

And even if they hadn't... so what? You're going to condemn the entirety of feminism (and the field of sociology, I suppose) because one person early in its history may have lied?

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#106

Post by mtrimpe » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 11:11 PM UTC

Tichy wrote: post #103

I agree with his experiences, and there would be more to add. For example our baby-friend families usually were connected via my wife (from birth preparation classes for example), so it was a bit harder/more awkward for me to call them up to hang out so that our kids could play together. That's not active discrimination, just stuff that happens. I wanted to throw some other thought to HN: I've come to the conclusion…

I forgot which country it was but one of the Nordic countries tried hard to get parental leave taken and in the end they had to make 2 of 6 months of (fully paid) leave exclusively for the father.

Once they did that and the family was actually leaving paid leave on the table otherwise, fathers are now nearing 40% of birth leave.

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#107

Post by stevewilber » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 11:16 PM UTC

rudog wrote: post #18

"Don't worry, I'm not going to nab your kid, I already got this one." Is this common place? As of a father of twins; I regularly take my kids to the park and either I'm oblivious to these looks or I am too busy playing zone defense on two almost 3 year olds that I don't even notice.

As a work-from-home dad with a very flexible schedule, I spend quite a bit of time at the park during work hours. My experience is closer to yours than most others in this thread. I find the moms/nannies/grandparents quite welcoming and friendly. Occasionally a topic of conversation will come up that may be a bit awkward, but otherwise I don't feel that I'm treated much differently. I certainly have never perceived that anyone felt threatened by my presence.

I'm not sure what would account for the difference. I live just a few miles from FB headquarters and am in the same demographic as OP.

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#108

Post by Tichy » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 11:31 PM UTC

mtrimpe wrote: post #106

Tichy wrote: post #103

I agree with his experiences, and there would be more to add. For example our baby-friend families usually were connected via my wife (from birth preparation classes for example), so it was a bit harder/more awkward for me to call them up to hang out so that our kids could play together. That's not active discrimination, just stuff that happens. I wanted to throw some other thought to HN: I've come to the conclusion…

I forgot which country it was but one of the Nordic countries tried hard to get parental leave taken and in the end they had to make 2 of 6 months of (fully paid) leave exclusively for the father. Once they did that and the family was actually leaving paid leave on the table otherwise, fathers are now nearing 40% of birth leave.

Granted, I wasn't even thinking about the paid paternity leave. Obviously if the state pays for it, the thought "how much am I willing to pay my babysitter" is not a factor. It's actually fascinating that despite full pay a lot of dads apparently prefer to stay at work? I can only assume that they worry about a negative impact to their career in the long run (ie employer doesn't think they are loyal enough to promote them)?

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#109

Post by dquail » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 11:32 PM UTC

enraged_camel wrote: post #50

The part about being viewed suspiciously at the playground was particularly awful. Why is it that we as a society are so fucking fearful? We have an irrational fear of communists, socialists, terrorists, serial killers, sex offenders, and of course, child molesters and abductors. Everyone thinks that there is someone out there who is out to hurt them and their family. Like, that is the default assumption , and people…

Am I the only dad out there that constantly takes my daughter to the park / science center / library alone ... and doesn't feel the least bit weird about it? In 3 years I've received nothing but smiles and conversation for doing this. Maybe it's a Canadian thing ...

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#110

Post by icebraining » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 11:36 PM UTC

noblethrasher wrote: post #32

3825 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There is no gender equality when it comes to what a child needs. A child needs the smile of a mother as much as they need the smile of a father. And one can not replace the other. There is such a heavy statement that I cannot begin to explain how wrong it is. Are you saying that a single parent cannot raise a child on her (or his) own? In the absence of any scientific evidence in your support, I'd say you are absolu…

To the degree that breastfeeding might be non-negligbly beneficial[1], sex-inequality with respect to child rearing is manifest. [1] http://news.brown.edu/pressreleases/2013/06/breastfeeding

You can bottle breastmilk for the father to feed his child. Some women even pump exclusively (e.g., because the child has trouble latching).

There are also breastmilk banks, for parents who can't produce their own (partially or at all).