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

The biology of dads

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 285 posts

Re: The biology of dads

#211

Post by nine_k »

ksdale wrote: post #58

"They seemed like ideal infant-caregivers: calm, gentle, patient and sensitive. They didn’t seem like men you would go to battle with. In fact, they were the very antithesis of the warriors and athletes – think Maximus, Achilles or Michael Jordan – often associated with a masculine ideal." I became a father quite a bit before most of my friends, and so was the butt of some jokes about masculinity for the way I parent…

Also, having become a dad, one changes the attitude to the "battle".

Instead of being a brash, brave, showy warrior who just doesnt' care about the danger and only cares about valor, you become a diligent, careful, never-surrendering and deadly efficient warrior, because you care a bit less about valor, but badly need to win. You have some specific lives to protect.

Re: The biology of dads

#212

Post by DubiousPusher »

Kluny wrote: post #119
TooRightKite wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's nice, but why did your step daughter max the pride-meter instead of one of your own?

You're making a pretty big leap of assumption here. - he didn't say that he had biological kids - the step daughter is his own daughter, they aren't two different things - he didn't say that if he does have biological kids, that he didn't tear up at their graduation - he also didn't specify the ages of any of his kids, so there's no reason to assume that any others have graduated I'm curious as to where those assumpt…

> - the step daughter is his own daughter, they aren't two different things

Thank you.

Re: The biology of dads

#213

Post by R0b0t1 »

surge wrote: post #200
swat535 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your testosterone levels are reduced as a man when you become a father [1], I wouldn't be surprised if that affects men's behaviour. Our evolution is complex, I find it fascinating that you can often dig up research with regards to this topic. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3182719/

I think he's overstating how much effect T has on this. I'm on HRT due to past medical issues that drastically reduced my T levels. I remember what it was like to have my T really low, Now that I'm on T, and probably about normal or higher than average for my age, I can't say its changed drastically my attitude towards my children, how gentle I am towards them and much less increased my willingness or proclivity to l…

I think it true that modern childrearing might have an affect on activity levels, but small changes in T level produce very outsized effects. If anything literature understates the role that hormones play in human cognition.

Re: The biology of dads

#214

Post by borroka »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #169
lambda_obrien wrote: post #129

I agree with most of the comments here as a semi-new father, so I won't rehash then, but I really wish more people could experience the emotions and struggles of parenthood sooner, I think it makes a person realize what's important in life and causes one to mature quickly. I think people would be nicer to one another if they could be a parent for a year, at least.

> I think people would be nicer to one another if they could be a parent for a year, at least. Eh. I've seen other parents be just as shitty as anyone else. I don't think parenthood is an empathy-panacea.

Exactly.

How do we forget every time there are these conversations that most abuses happen in families? How do we forget about the victims of parental harassment, shaming, disinterest and violence?

I don't know whether being a parent makes someone better or worse; but there are many parents who should have done something different that lazy Sunday afternoon.

Re: The biology of dads

#215

Post by lotsofpulp »

ksdale wrote: post #139
frenchyatwork wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, somewhat ironic, but my willingness to "go to battle" for my family is far greater than my willingness to "go to battle" for anything before having a family I'd bet the "for my family" part is critical to this statement though, and in the modern "Western" world, at least, such circumstances are exceedingly rare. I'm less inclined to go mountaineering or ice climbing, to give a more realistic example, partly b…

It is, surprisingly, not as critical as I would have thought. There is something about being a dad that is sufficiently general, the idea that I'm responsible for another person's wellbeing entirely, that made me more confident that I could be trusted with greater responsibility. And I use the phrase "go to battle" almost as metaphorically as possible, in the sense of my willingness to be in conflict with people over…

The actual way people go to battle is by ensuring maximum societal resources go towards their own kids. Moving to suburbs poorer people can’t afford, wealthier people keeping their kids from mingling with poorer kids, etc.

Re: The biology of dads

#216

Post by lukaszkups »

cortesoft wrote: post #152
lqet wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "go to battle" I remember that in the first days after my kid was born, the thought that I would defend that child to the bitter end against any attacker suddenly seemed completely natural, even trivial. It was quite strange and included a sudden extreme awareness of (and aggressive feelings against) animals which came to close. This included dogs. The feelings were overwhelmingly archaic. I talked to my wife about…

I can totally relate to this. I have always been a completely non-violent person, but I remember the feeling of “I would kill to defend this tiny creature” when I became a dad. It was pretty powerful.

+1 to this.

Some time ago a friend of mine from high school asked me how it feels to have a child and what do I feel for them - my answer was: "do you remember the time when you most powerfully fell in love to someone? Multiply that then by 100 and you'll get the answer" :)

This is my very most fav life quote I've ever came up with :)

Re: The biology of dads

#217

Post by engineer_22 »

kortilla wrote: post #181
zarkov99 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but morality aside there is something to be admired in people that do dangerous, frightnening and difficult things for a living.

“Difficult” does not belong with the other two and I’m not sure we need to admire people who have to risk their lives so much as pity them. It’s unfortunate we have so many roles in society that still require that.

I think life without risk or discomfort would be very boring indeed.

Re: The biology of dads

#218

Post by nkrisc »

TooRightKite wrote: post #114
gabereiser wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I echo this. I’m an empty nester now but when I was raising kids (really early on) most of my friends were going to bars and didn’t understand the responsibility. Now they are all having kids and looking to me for answers... like there’s a manual for kids. I felt the most pride in my life watching my step-daughter get her diploma. I, a masculine man who was taught to bottle it all up and stuff upper lip, cried like a…

That's nice, but why did your step daughter max the pride-meter instead of one of your own?

Merely producing biological offspring doesn't make then your kid in any meaningful social sense; ask anyone with a parent who bailed real early. Being a child's parent makes them your child, whether they're biologically related to you or not.

The biological relationship we have with our children is probably the least significant part of our relationship with them.

Re: The biology of dads

#219

Post by lukewrites »

Interesting summary. Since fathers make unique contributions to the development of their children (eg language development [0] and social skills[1]), it makes sense that the children would also affect the fathers, if they're connected/"there" enough.

Since I'm guessing there will be a bunch of parents in this thread, let me make a humble book recommendation:

Unconditional Parenting by Alfie Kohn

The Myth of the Spoiled Child by Alfie Kohn

Kohn is an education researcher who's kind of an iconoclast. His research has focused heavily on what _helps_ children gain the knowledge, academic wherewithal, and social-emotional skills to be successful in life. His results have been pretty surprising: Homework doesn't do much for children. "Time outs" are harmful. And the list goes on.

I'm simultaneously reading Unconditional Parenting and The Myth of the Spoiled Child, which I'd recommend. The latter looks at American accepted wisdom about children (every generation thinks that their kids are dumber, lazier, and more mollycoddled than _they_ were) and makes some pretty interesting juxtapositions between what we say we want for our kids and how we treat them.

0 - https://fpg.unc.edu/sites/fpg.unc.edu/files/resources/snapsh... 1 - https://www.researchgate.net/profile/C_Lewis2/publication/22...

Re: The biology of dads

#220

Post by AussieWog93 »

TooRightKite wrote: post #114
gabereiser wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I echo this. I’m an empty nester now but when I was raising kids (really early on) most of my friends were going to bars and didn’t understand the responsibility. Now they are all having kids and looking to me for answers... like there’s a manual for kids. I felt the most pride in my life watching my step-daughter get her diploma. I, a masculine man who was taught to bottle it all up and stuff upper lip, cried like a…

That's nice, but why did your step daughter max the pride-meter instead of one of your own?

I'm assuming he put in literal decades of blood, sweat and tears getting his step daughter to that point. How could you not be proud at the moment of payoff?
Post reply on HN