Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Stay-at-home fathers 'up 10-fold'

Expand Messages
  • Spence
    Stay-at-home fathers up 10-fold ... Stay-at-home fathers up 10-fold Some dads find childcare more rewarding than going to work The number of stay-at-home
    Message 1 of 8 , Apr 1, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Stay-at-home fathers 'up 10-fold'

      -----------------------
      Stay-at-home fathers 'up 10-fold'


      Some dads find childcare more rewarding than going to work
      The number of stay-at-home fathers in the UK has risen 10-fold in the last
      decade, a survey suggests.
      The results of the survey of 1,000 parents suggest around 6% of fathers, or
      600,000 men, are now their child's primary carer, up from 60,000 in 2000.
      The majority of stay-at-home fathers quizzed said the reason for this was
      because the mother earned more money.
      The web survey for insurance firm Aviva said the mother earned more in one
      in six of all the households it surveyed.

      Men [are] becoming aware that they haven't had it all...in their
      relationship with their children they've had less contact
      Adrienne Burgess, the Fatherhood Institute
      The figures also suggested 18% of couples shared childcare responsibilities
      equally.
      Adrienne Burgess, research director at the Fatherhood Institute, said the
      findings showed men wanted to spend "more time" at home.
      "It just isn't the same [now], there are more women in higher education and
      are starting to earn quite a lot," she said.
      She acknowledged rising childcare costs mean some parents are forced to give
      up work, but said some men also want a closer relationship with their
      family.
      Happy fathers
      "Men want to spend more time with their children, men [are] becoming aware
      that they haven't had it all," she said.
      "In their relationship with their children they've had less contact than the
      mother."
      The study suggested the men that stayed at home were happier with this
      arrangement than the women, with 75% of fathers saying they were lucky to
      spend so much time with their children.
      Nearly a third of fathers also said they found childcare more rewarding than
      going to work, but 10% admitted running around after their sons and
      daughters made them feel less of a man.
      In more than two-thirds of households surveyed, one parent had reduced their
      hours or given up work completely in order to look after their family, with
      a third saying they did so because of childcare costs.
      Some women found the role reversal difficult, with 37% admitting they felt
      guilty going out to work and leaving their children, but only 9% said they
      would swap places with their partner and stay at home.
      Louise Colley, from Aviva, said: "While both roles are equally valuable,
      nowadays it's quite likely that women will be heading off to the office
      while men are changing nappies and doing the school run."
      ------------------
      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8605824.stm
    • k_over_hbarc
      The figures of 10-fold seems implauibly high to me, but no doubt there has been an increase. What s dubious is to suggest that this is good for men, when in
      Message 2 of 8 , Apr 6, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        The figures of 10-fold seems implauibly high to me, but no doubt there has been an increase. What's dubious is to suggest that this is good for men, when in reality its cause is largely not free choice but men having less job opportunities than women, which we are bound to oppose. What makes one feel 'less of a man' is not child-care per se (though that may occasionally be true) but the realisation of being financially supported by one's wife. Being dependent on a woman has never been considered an honorable way to live, and for good reason.

        Andrew Usher
      • laurence almand
          I don t know how accurate the figures are, but if so, in a way this is good.   In view of all the boys born to single mothers who are growing up without
        Message 3 of 8 , Apr 7, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
           
          I don't know how accurate the figures are, but if so, in a way this is good.
           
          In view of all the boys born to single mothers who are growing up without fathers or good male role models, having a father in the house is a positive thing for children, especially male children.
           
          If the wife wants to knock herself out earning money, getting ulcers and such, well, let her.  Managing a household is not easy, so if the man wants to manage it, let him do so.   He can always work part time if he wants to do his share.
           
          Laurence

          From: k_over_hbarc <k_over_hbarc@...>
          To: aum@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 8:14 PM
          Subject: [AUM] Re: Stay-at-home fathers 'up 10-fold'
           
          The figures of 10-fold seems implauibly high to me, but no doubt there has been an increase. What's dubious is to suggest that this is good for men, when in reality its cause is largely not free choice but men having less job opportunities than women, which we are bound to oppose. What makes one feel 'less of a man' is not child-care per se (though that may occasionally be true) but the realisation of being financially supported by one's wife. Being dependent on a woman has never been considered an honorable way to live, and for good reason.

          Andrew Usher

        • k_over_hbarc
          Look, I repeat that having fathers raise children is not a bad thing in itself, and indeed might be considered a good thing. But the total effects on men and
          Message 4 of 8 , Apr 9, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Look, I repeat that having fathers raise children is not a bad thing in itself, and indeed might be considered a good thing. But the total effects on men and women must be considered and not just the one fact pulled out and praised.

            I don't look for silver linings on turds, so I just see that the real story here is the discrimination against men in the job market. That's why it's happening, not because men and women just agree that this is a better way.

            Andrew Usher
          • laurence almand
            Andrew -   You are indeed correct.   There is a huge amount of blatant discrimination against men - especially competent White men - in the workplace,
            Message 5 of 8 , Apr 9, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Andrew -
               
              You are indeed correct.   There is a huge amount of blatant discrimination against men - especially competent White men - in the workplace, especially in regard to government employment. 
               
              In our modern government bureaucracy, less competent women are often favored and promoted, while competent men are passed over, all in the name of "equality."    (In California there is actually a state regulation that prohibits telling the truth about incompetent females.)
               
              I worked for the government, so I know what goes on.   Is it any wonder our country is in such a mess?
               
              Laurence

              From: k_over_hbarc <k_over_hbarc@...>
              To: aum@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 4:37 AM
              Subject: [AUM] Re: Stay-at-home fathers 'up 10-fold'
               
              Look, I repeat that having fathers raise children is not a bad thing in itself, and indeed might be considered a good thing. But the total effects on men and women must be considered and not just the one fact pulled out and praised.

              I don't look for silver linings on turds, so I just see that the real story here is the discrimination against men in the job market. That's why it's happening, not because men and women just agree that this is a better way.

              Andrew Usher

            • Bob Allen
              Yes, I ve been passed over for hiring and promotion many times because of systematic racist and sexist discrimination against white men.  Bob        
              Message 6 of 8 , Apr 9, 2013
              • 0 Attachment

                Yes, I've been passed over for hiring and promotion many times because of systematic racist and sexist discrimination against white men. 
                Bob
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                From: laurence almand <laurencealmand@...>
                To: "aum@yahoogroups.com" <aum@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 3:33 PM
                Subject: Re: [AUM] Re: Stay-at-home fathers 'up 10-fold'
                 
                Andrew -
                 
                You are indeed correct.   There is a huge amount of blatant discrimination against men - especially competent White men - in the workplace, especially in regard to government employment. 
                 
                In our modern government bureaucracy, less competent women are often favored and promoted, while competent men are passed over, all in the name of "equality."    (In California there is actually a state regulation that prohibits telling the truth about incompetent females.)
                 
                I worked for the government, so I know what goes on.   Is it any wonder our country is in such a mess?
                 
                Laurence

                From: k_over_hbarc <k_over_hbarc@...>
                To: aum@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 4:37 AM
                Subject: [AUM] Re: Stay-at-home fathers 'up 10-fold'
                 
                Look, I repeat that having fathers raise children is not a bad thing in itself, and indeed might be considered a good thing. But the total effects on men and women must be considered and not just the one fact pulled out and praised. I don't look for silver linings on turds, so I just see that the real story here is the discrimination against men in the job market. That's why it's happening, not because men and women just agree that this is a better way. Andrew Usher
              • k_over_hbarc
                ... As to government employment, I always wonder why no one, is the men s movement or elsewhere, has asked to bring back the old civil service exam system. We
                Message 7 of 8 , Apr 11, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In aum@yahoogroups.com, laurence almand <laurencealmand@...> wrote:

                  > You are indeed correct.   There is a huge amount of blatant discrimination against men - especially competent White men - in the workplace, especially in regard to government employment. 

                  As to government employment, I always wonder why no one, is the men's movement or elsewhere, has asked to bring back the old civil service exam system. We at least know it worked, and can't help but producing a better class of government workers than we have today. It was ended of course because people complained that women and blacks were discriminated against by it, and no one wants to seem 'racist' or 'sexist', plus the right is obsessed with the pure capitalist philosophy that could not endorse such a thing, refusing to see jobs as benefits and thinking the government should operate like private business.

                  I never experienced it myself, but I've heard enough references to it that I have a fair idea. We have come so far from that now, that it is widely admitted that a white man who's not a veteran has no chance of getting a Federal job.

                  > In our modern government bureaucracy, less competent women are often favored and promoted, while competent men are passed over, all in the name of "equality."    (In California there is actually a state regulation that prohibits telling the truth about incompetent females.)

                  In both government and private business, I bet most of the people in charge (if they're white men, at least) know what's going on but can't act on it because of the modern rules and taboo against speaking about it.

                  Andrew Usher
                • laurence almand
                  When I worked for the San Francisco Police Department in the early 80s,  the police tests were judged to be discriminatory   because the dumb Blacks and
                  Message 8 of 8 , Apr 11, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment

                    When I worked for the San Francisco Police Department in the early 80s,  the police tests were judged to be "discriminatory"  because the dumb Blacks and physically weak females could not pass them.
                     
                    To put the lid on, most of the written tests  - which are crucial to choosing the best officers - were thrown out because they "discriminated" against incompetent minorities and stupid illiterates.
                     
                    The result was the virtual ruin of the SFPD, where modern  "officers"  can hardly read the instruction books.   The SFPD has the lowest crime-clearance rate of any major city in California.  In view of the people they are forced to hire, it is no wonder.
                     
                    In the old days the government was able to chose the best and the brightest, nowadays they have to take the worst and the stupidest.   All in the name of "equality" nonsense. 
                     
                    And yes, competent White males often find it impossible to get government jobs, especially in the Fed.  Look at the mess the Postal Service is in -  but just try getting a job with the USPS if you are a competent White male!
                     
                    Ayn Rand was right.  The favoritism of mediocrity is bringing about the downfall of our society  - just look around you.
                     
                    Laurence
                     
                     
                    From: k_over_hbarc <k_over_hbarc@...>
                    To: aum@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 4:49 AM
                    Subject: [AUM] Re: Stay-at-home fathers 'up 10-fold'
                     
                    --- In mailto:aum%40yahoogroups.com, laurence almand <laurencealmand@...> wrote:

                    > You are indeed correct.   There is a huge amount of blatant discrimination against men - especially competent White men - in the workplace, especially in regard to government employment. 

                    As to government employment, I always wonder why no one, is the men's movement or elsewhere, has asked to bring back the old civil service exam system. We at least know it worked, and can't help but producing a better class of government workers than we have today. It was ended of course because people complained that women and blacks were discriminated against by it, and no one wants to seem 'racist' or 'sexist', plus the right is obsessed with the pure capitalist philosophy that could not endorse such a thing, refusing to see jobs as benefits and thinking the government should operate like private business.

                    I never experienced it myself, but I've heard enough references to it that I have a fair idea. We have come so far from that now, that it is widely admitted that a white man who's not a veteran has no chance of getting a Federal job.

                    > In our modern government bureaucracy, less competent women are often favored and promoted, while competent men are passed over, all in the name of "equality."    (In California there is actually a state regulation that prohibits telling the truth about incompetent females.)

                    In both government and private business, I bet most of the people in charge (if they're white men, at least) know what's going on but can't act on it because of the modern rules and taboo against speaking about it.

                    Andrew Usher

                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.