Monogamy?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Conceptions of what a good Masculine roll model, and a good feminine roll model are vary so much from culture to culture, I wonder how much value they really have,

 

looks like another manufactured argument here for the sake of argument. do you have kids? have you been around enough to see how their role models affect them? have you read any of the research that comes out periodically on this subject? just because you don't like a "non-PC" truth, do you feel compelled to argue against it with no backing but emotion?

 

 

 

[selkirk]

On the contrary, I believe most people's capacity to love is very finite.

 

Capacity to love? or Capacity to not be ruled by the nasty side?

 

I think the Capacity is there, but I think very few people are anywhere close to capacity. Just like anything else the closer you get to capacity, the more challenging it becomes, and I do think people are fundamentally lazy.

[archenemy]

True, and our parents aren't the only male and female role models in our lives.

And not only that, just b/c a person is in a heterosexual relationship doesn't automatically make them a better parent or a better role model.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

True, and our parents aren't the only male and female role models in our lives.

And not only that, just b/c a person is in a heterosexual relationship doesn't automatically make them a better parent or a better role model.

 

umm, who ever said that? again, I think people read way too much into the idea of an IDEAL. if you take away from one aspect you have to fill it somehow with another.

 

 

[lizard_brain]

True, and our parents aren't the only male and female role models in our lives.

And not only that, just b/c a person is in a heterosexual relationship doesn't automatically make them a better parent or a better role model.

 

Oh, yeah? Just ask my bible-belt, christan-nazi, midwest relatives about that. They'll set you straight (no pun intended).

[archenemy]

hee hee.

 

The other thing I've noticed is that people in general and children in specific have an amazing ability to adjust and thrive under a wide variety of circumstances.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

hee hee.

 

The other thing I've noticed is that people in general and children in specific have an amazing ability to adjust and thrive under a wide variety of circumstances.

 

that's funny, the thing I've noticed is how people who are majorly fucked up can trace it right back to something that happened to them in childhood.

 

[selkirk]

Conceptions of what a good Masculine roll model, and a good feminine roll model are vary so much from culture to culture, I wonder how much value they really have,

 

looks like another manufactured argument here for the sake of argument. do you have kids? have you been around enough to see how their role models affect them? have you read any of the research that comes out periodically on this subject? just because you don't like a "non-PC" truth, do you feel compelled to argue against it with no backing but emotion?

 

Don't have kids (yet), and of course I'm playing devils advocate What else is the purpose of spray?

 

And anyone who paid attention while growing up and going through high school, or actually watches their own nieces and nephews grow, has seen what affect role models have. I've watched lots of family grow up (and am related to) princesses and tom-boys, proto/agro males and nancy boys, gays, lesbians, and straight folkes, and have known every one of their parents, aunts, uncles, granparents, and great grandparens, and for the most part can trace their behaviours and tendencies back through three or four generations.

 

but no, I'm not up on the current research and probably won't take the time to be anytime soon. I'm extrapolating a bit based on the people I know and am related to, and whom I think would be better parents....

 

Care to enlighten us with research based "facts"?

 

I hate calling that stuff truth.... Facts imply incontrovertible evidence, truth necessitates a value judgment and point of view, both of which are far from incontrovertible.

[archenemy]

Oh really? I thought that was the justification blame game thing.

[lizard_brain]

hee hee.

 

The other thing I've noticed is that people in general and children in specific have an amazing ability to adjust and thrive under a wide variety of circumstances.

 

that's funny, the thing I've noticed is how people who are majorly fucked up can trace it right back to something that happened to them in childhood.

 

...By their hetero parents.

[archenemy]

hee hee.

 

The other thing I've noticed is that people in general and children in specific have an amazing ability to adjust and thrive under a wide variety of circumstances.

 

that's funny, the thing I've noticed is how people who are majorly fucked up can trace it right back to something that happened to them in childhood.

 

...By their hetero parents.

That's good. That's really good.

[JayB]

The ideal is parents who love they're kids, ideally love each other (or at least can be cordial), and keep the kids challenged and growing. Does it matter if it's 2 guys, 2 girls, or some other mixture?

 

 

yes, it does. nice PC try though.

 

kids need both a male and female role-model, so with same-sex parents, that missing role model needs to be filled somehow - ideally speaking that is.

 

male and female, or masculine and feminine? And why? Is it simply so that they have a frame of reference when interacting with the rest of us?

 

Conceptions of what a good Masculine roll model, and a good feminine roll model are vary so much from culture to culture, I wonder how much value they really have, except within that rather narrow group. When people lived and died within a few miles of where they were born, following the local social and familial norms may have been more necessary, but any more (especially in the US) we have the ability to create our own families and subcultures around us and can tune the people we associate with to our desires/beliefs. So I don't think that the traditional male/female has as much value as it used to.

 

I agree with the notion that same-sex couples can raise healthy, well-adjusted kids - but I also think that kids naturally seek persons of their own sex to model themselves after, and counsel from people who faced similar situations/obstacles/dilemmas, and if that's not present to a certain extent in the home, they'll seek it out elsewhere.

 

It'd be especially interesting to see what the statistics have to say about the outcomes in those cases of girls reared in male-male households, and boys reared in female-female households. My limited, biased, subjective, and wholly unscientific opinion is that boys raised in female-female homes will be both overprotected and overindulged in a way that's not going to prepare them terribly well for any of the more male-dominated environments that they happen to encounter in their lives.

[archenemy]

My experience with men raised in female-only homes (some with two moms, some with single mom and sisters) is that these men are bomb-proof. I love them.

 

I don't know any females raised in male only homes.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

that's funny, the thing I've noticed is how people who are majorly fucked up can trace it right back to something that happened to them in childhood.

 

...By their hetero parents.

 

umm, no, by ANY parents. could be gay, lesbian, or single parent, whatever.

 

[selkirk]

hee hee.

 

The other thing I've noticed is that people in general and children in specific have an amazing ability to adjust and thrive under a wide variety of circumstances.

 

that's funny, the thing I've noticed is how people who are majorly fucked up can trace it right back to something that happened to them in childhood.

 

Not particularly an either/or premise. Hell just about everything can be traced back to childhood, both good, bad, or indifferent.

 

 

an interesting tid bit came out earlier this year talking to my dad about school reform and some of the research he evaluated during his EDD....

He was saying that the best predictor of what will happen to a child (will they fundamentally be ok, or fundamentally screwed up) was the opinion of they're 5th grade teacher, with a correlation of 90% or better Kind of a scary when you think about it .....

[archenemy]

Admit it, he got you on that one.

 

 

[archenemy]

hee hee.

 

The other thing I've noticed is that people in general and children in specific have an amazing ability to adjust and thrive under a wide variety of circumstances.

 

that's funny, the thing I've noticed is how people who are majorly fucked up can trace it right back to something that happened to them in childhood.

 

Not particularly an either/or premise. Hell just about everything can be traced back to childhood, both good, bad, or indifferent.

 

 

an interesting tid bit came out earlier this year talking to my dad about school reform and some of the research he evaluated during his EDD....

He was saying that the best predictor of what will happen to a child (will they fundamentally be ok, or fundamentally screwed up) was the opinion of they're 5th grade teacher, with a correlation of 90% or better Kind of a scary when you think about it .....

My 6th grade teacher fucking hated me. Hated me.

I was a late bloomer I guess.

[selkirk]

The ideal is parents who love they're kids, ideally love each other (or at least can be cordial), and keep the kids challenged and growing. Does it matter if it's 2 guys, 2 girls, or some other mixture?

 

 

yes, it does. nice PC try though.

 

kids need both a male and female role-model, so with same-sex parents, that missing role model needs to be filled somehow - ideally speaking that is.

 

male and female, or masculine and feminine? And why? Is it simply so that they have a frame of reference when interacting with the rest of us?

 

Conceptions of what a good Masculine roll model, and a good feminine roll model are vary so much from culture to culture, I wonder how much value they really have, except within that rather narrow group. When people lived and died within a few miles of where they were born, following the local social and familial norms may have been more necessary, but any more (especially in the US) we have the ability to create our own families and subcultures around us and can tune the people we associate with to our desires/beliefs. So I don't think that the traditional male/female has as much value as it used to.

 

I agree with the notion that same-sex couples can raise healthy, well-adjusted kids - but I also think that kids naturally seek persons of their own sex to model themselves after, and counsel from people who faced similar situations/obstacles/dilemmas, and if that's not present to a certain extent in the home, they'll seek it out elsewhere.

 

It'd be especially interesting to see what the statistics have to say about the outcomes in those cases of girls reared in male-male households, and boys reared in female-female households. My limited, biased, subjective, and wholly unscientific opinion is that boys raised in female-female homes will be both overprotected and overindulged in a way that's not going to prepare them terribly well for any of the more male-dominated environments that they happen to encounter in their lives.

 

 

Have you ever seen fathers dote on their daughters? jeebus.....

You wanna see coddling?

 

Not all moms are the controlling doting type either, and everyone I've ever met that was was hetero... I would expect that after going through the challenges of being in a non-standard relationship, any successful (i.e. long term) female/female or male/male couple would recognize the importance of being independant and self aware, which seems like it wouldn't go well with coddling and domineering.

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Admit it, he got you on that one.

 

 

no, he didn't. my point was not that ANY hetero couple is the bestest in the world, but that the ideal for raising children involves a father and mother. having a shitty father and/or mother is not part of the ideal.

 

and, back to the monogamy topic, what I have noticed is that children of divorce seem to have the most trouble, on average, with committment. I'm pretty sure I've read reports on research backing this up and I've damn well seen it in people I know. again, the non-ideal situation of lacking a stable set of parents leads to (on average) worse outcomes.

 

likewise, girls with no strong father figure are more likely to be sexually abused and have other problems (drug use, depression, etc). Again, I recall reading reports on studies of this.

 

anyways, I'm done with this thread. I'm sorry I got sucked into it. you guys would argue the shade of blue of the sky if it got into your mind.

 

[selkirk]

Admit it, he got you on that one.

 

Never!!!

Never admit defeat!

All arguments must be to the death!

 

 

 

 

sorry, sorry.... i'm Italian and Irish, I can't help it.

[selkirk]

and, back to the monogamy topic, what I have noticed is that children of divorce seem to have the most trouble, on average, with committment. I'm pretty sure I've read reports on research backing this up and I've damn well seen it in people I know. again, the non-ideal situation of lacking a stable set of parents leads to (on average) worse outcomes.

Yep, I'll vouch for that. Had lots of commitment issues to work through over here

But what does stable have to do with Gender?

 

likewise, girls with no strong father figure are more likely to be sexually abused and have other problems (drug use, depression, etc). Again, I recall reading reports on studies of this.

 

I could buy that, but it would be interesting to know the breakdown of families followed in this research? Where they all hetero, or some derivative (single hetero parent), and was there enough representation of same/sex couples? With similar breakdowns (stable couple, vs. single broken couple etc.) Is it tied to gender, or is it tied to strength of character/sense of independance?

 

 

Of course there are three kinds of lies......

 

[ClimbingPanther]

MAKE LUV NOT WAR

 

but sometimes making love is what makes war! oh noe!

[markwebster]

I've been with the same woman since 1976. She started out as my hiking partner, turned into my climbing partner, then the mother of my children, and is still my climbing partner, though not as often as I'd like...the climbing, that is.

 

Before I met her, it was the sixties and early seventies and for three years while other people were in college, I was living on communes and exploring the multiple partner, free love stuff, woodstock, rainbow family of life, walkabout, hitch hiking the country...etc....massive waste of time.

 

Looking back on it, I think the mind altering substances (including alcohol) that were common back then played a large part in my experimentation, and that of the women around me. Getting laid was as easy as "Do you want to?", 5 minutes after we met. But always there was the drugs or wine beforehand. I wonder if people who still do that, still do the drugs?

 

I shudder, thinking back on how stupid I was then at 17. Maybe just a backlash against the church? ...gramps was a missionary. I would not even consider that now. I think it helped to get it out of my system then, sewing my wild oats so to speak.

 

Bottom line: marry a climber, make sure you both stay fit and attractive, and keep climbing. We made a pre-nuptial agreement in '79: if either one of us got fat, automatic divorce. Sounds harsh, I know, but it keeps us in shape and together.

 

 

[Dechristo]

My fifth grade teachers were intimidated by me. I wouldn't say they "hated" me, but they didn't like me for keeping them on their toes.

[lizard_brain]

My fifth grade teacher thought I was strange.