7 ms·

Speaking as a father of a newborn, I feel that parenthood would be more inclusive. But hey, I'm used to looking at nappies where "mothers know best" (I will pi

Speaking as a father of a newborn, I feel that parenthood would be more inclusive. But hey, I'm used to looking at nappies where "mothers know best" (I will pick different brand), so this is still well entrenched.

davegauer 8y ago
It seems to be one of those double standards that a lot of people are still okay with for some reason. The one that still gets me is "women having it all" (children and a career). Why can't this be "parents" instead? We're not all living in the 1950s anymore.
- gascan 8y ago
  still okay with for some reason Sometimes reality gets in the way of ideals. Men, for example, are pitifully bad at lactating. Given initial conditions like that- things quickly fall into the familiar pattern.
  - sundvor 8y ago
    BS. I can't produce milk but I can do everything else. So in the middle of the night when the breast is done if baby is unsettled I can take care of this, which can take ages. Sharing this exhausting and sometimes excruciating workload is a big part of parenthood here. It is also ultimately highly rewarding; editing this as she's just about fallen asleep in my arms, gorgeous thing.
    - Retric 8y ago
      I am all for a 50/50 split if both parents want to work or even a stay at home dad. But, it's more than just breastfeeding. Giving birth is hard from a few weeks and arguably months before to a few weeks and or months after. That naturally tends to taking a few months off and hey infant needs a lot of care so when not extend that a little. Add a second pregnancy at 1-3 years after the fist and it's easy to end up with a stay at home mom. Now, this is far from the only pattern, but it is common for real biological reasons.
      - sundvor 8y ago
        I'm not even saying it's a 50/50 split because unless you're exceedingly well off, or perhaps consulting from home, it is not going to be that initially - if you want baby to be breastfed, which is ideal whenever possible, someone's got to bring in the income. I merely took objection to the exclusionary term that is motherhood, because in this context I deal with screaming babies a lot - as a father. That is not "motherhood", it is "parenthood". Unless it's all about single women bringing their babies up alone? I saw no reference to that in TFA. It's a bit like craftsman vs craftsperson, not that I really wanted to go there. But there are real reasons for using more inclusionary terms even when the traditional "feel more natural" (to the speaker / author) or whatever.
        brownbat 8y ago
        > breastfed... is ideal whenever possible The AAP and WHO both endorse this position, and I can't find a reputable leading health org that argues otherwise. The more I read about the basis of the claim though the more confused I get. Parenting advice sites all point out that it helps child immunity. But the underlying studies are based on the ingestion of immunoglobulin, which doesn't even survive digestion. So essentially it protects the esophagus against waterborne illnesses, ie, mainly those no longer common in the developed world. That definitely makes sense in terms of evolutionarily-relevant child mortality threats, but that context is always omitted. Or you get claims of improved cognition, then find meta-analysis that can't reproduce any results after five years. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/03/23/peds.2016-1848 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/03/... https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/04/the-case-against-breast-feeding/307311/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/04/the-cas... Parenting guidance seems full of replication crisis issues, even in the medical literature. That's been the most eye opening thing about becoming a parent... people's strong interest in parenting makes it hard to explain the poor state of the data on the topic.
        kaitai 8y ago
        That's not the whole story (re: immunoglobulin). You're right in broad-brush strokes. The abstract at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12850343 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12850343 has some quick notes on the broader context. For immunoglobulin in particular, when you say "doesn't survive digestion," you're missing the substantial amounts of IgA (ok, milk sIgA) in the intestine. There it will bind with lots of bad stuff, preventing said bad stuff from causing an immune response. (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257684/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257684/ is one place to read about this.) You also must consider all the leukocytes in breast milk. Both maternal and infant infections cause huge increases in leukocyte production. There is a theory (hard to test) that babies like to stick their hands in mom's mouth while breastfeeding so that mom gets baby germs, and then mom will make appropriate leukocytes. Bizarrely, baby backwash (into the breast! while feeding!) also leads to maternal immunological response. Fun fact: breast milk from the same mom can vary in color dramatically (from blue to white to yellow) and a lot of that has to do with the contents, with yellow in particular generally having a high leukocyte content.
  - hueving 8y ago
    I don't need to lactate to take my kid to the park without judgment.
  - andrepd 8y ago
    Name one thing, apart from breastfeeding, that men can't do that women can, when it comes to taking care of a child. Why is it, then, that it's still "unmanly" to change diapers, or god forbid, even be a stay-at-home dad?
    - kaitai 8y ago
      I have to add that because dad can't lactate, he's developed more sophisticated strategies for dealing with infant discontent than this mom :)
    - Retric 8y ago
      Take care of an infant while recovering from birth without taking extra time of. That's not a huge difference, but it is economically significant for many couples especially when they have physically demanding jobs.
      - watwut 8y ago
        The recovery period after birth is not that long. It can be anything between few days and two months, but not much more.
  - zasz 8y ago
    Nonsense. My sister-in-law is a professor and my brother is the stay-at-home dad, for the sake of her career. They're on kid #2 now. He does all the nighttime stuff so she can sleep and be refreshed for work.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
- kolpa 8y ago
  Who is saying "women having it all" and not "men having it all" ?
  - girvo 8y ago
    The bulk of mainstream media. A quick google will show that, though interestingly it also shows some newer articles raising the same point as the GP there.
- bonniemuffin 8y ago
  I think it's mostly because, in a very real sense, men have always been able to have it all. Men have always been able to have children and a career (because their wives stayed home to raise them!), so the quote isn't as poignant for them. BUT -- I do think it's actually useful to talk about "parents having it all", because all those breadwinner men with stay-at-home wives missed out on a lot of quality bonding time with their kids. They may have thought they had it all, but they actually missed out on developing real, meaningful relationships with their kids.
  - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
    It sounds like you've completely misunderstood the aphorism "raising kids and a having a career". It's not the state of being a biological parent that's sought after (which yes parents have automatically) but of _raising_ children. You can't raise children in absentia. If you're concentrating on your career you simply can't dedicate yourself to raising children. So, no fathers haven't always had it all because having it all is a practical impossibility in almost all walks of life.
    - bonniemuffin 8y ago
      I think you and I are saying exactly the same thing here. That's exactly what I meant by "they actually missed out on developing real, meaningful relationships with their kids."
Avshalom 8y ago
Did you read the article? because it is very clearly about historical books explicitly about mothers. If you want ~100CE greek doctors to be more inclusive you're gonna need a time machine.
- craftyguy 8y ago
  I think GP would like that to change, hence his comment.. You don't have to change history (lol) like you suggest to do that.
  - sundvor 8y ago
    Precisely, thanks.
iends 8y ago
Reminds me of the onsies that have arrows for head, arms, etc and say “You can do this Dad”
xevb3k 8y ago
Parenthood, particularly in some communities is like entering some kind of twilight zone. In particular I’ve been shocked at how many fathers do almost nothing in terms of childcare. It’s a shame that there isn’t a more general expectation on fathers to look after their kids at least to some extent, and that not looking after your kids isn’t considered socially unacceptable. I don’t believe this is just the fault of “men”, but I think it comes from a surprising lack on understanding in terms of how much work looking after kids is. It’s pretty much a 16 hour a day job for the first few years. If you don’t have someone to help it’s almost unbearable.
- darkerside 8y ago
  It's unfortunately understandable that this behavior would evolve, culturally if not biologically. Because of our reproductive systems, men are incentivized to play the numbers game and women to invest in created offspring. That said, I agree it's a shame when it actually plays out that way and our society as a whole (and even fathers in modern society) lose out.
  - rdlecler1 8y ago
    There’s an evolutionary underpinning driving a statistical difference in rearing behavior of males and females. You’d expect mothers to always commit more resources to their children because (1) eggs are expensive and spermm is cheap and the number or progeny is limited (2) high cuckolding rates also imply that men will hedge by spending less resources on their family. (3) Males may take a different strategy that contributes to the family which involve risk taking and high mortality rates (there’s no free lunch).
  - KirinDave 8y ago
    > It's unfortunately understandable that this behavior would evolve, culturally if not biologically. Because of our reproductive systems, men are incentivized to play the numbers game and women to invest in created offspring. Fathers have multiple physical adaptations for fatherhood that are very important. The idea that fathers experience no hormonal or physical changes is not scientific. Much like mothers, though, if they remove themselves from the proximity of their children these effects cease.

davegauer 8y ago

It seems to be one of those double standards that a lot of people are still okay with for some reason. The one that still gets me is "women having it all" (children and a career). Why can't this be "parents" instead? We're not all living in the 1950s anymore.

gascan 8y ago
still okay with for some reason Sometimes reality gets in the way of ideals. Men, for example, are pitifully bad at lactating. Given initial conditions like that- things quickly fall into the familiar pattern.
- sundvor 8y ago
  BS. I can't produce milk but I can do everything else. So in the middle of the night when the breast is done if baby is unsettled I can take care of this, which can take ages. Sharing this exhausting and sometimes excruciating workload is a big part of parenthood here. It is also ultimately highly rewarding; editing this as she's just about fallen asleep in my arms, gorgeous thing.
  - Retric 8y ago
    I am all for a 50/50 split if both parents want to work or even a stay at home dad. But, it's more than just breastfeeding. Giving birth is hard from a few weeks and arguably months before to a few weeks and or months after. That naturally tends to taking a few months off and hey infant needs a lot of care so when not extend that a little. Add a second pregnancy at 1-3 years after the fist and it's easy to end up with a stay at home mom. Now, this is far from the only pattern, but it is common for real biological reasons.
    - sundvor 8y ago
      I'm not even saying it's a 50/50 split because unless you're exceedingly well off, or perhaps consulting from home, it is not going to be that initially - if you want baby to be breastfed, which is ideal whenever possible, someone's got to bring in the income. I merely took objection to the exclusionary term that is motherhood, because in this context I deal with screaming babies a lot - as a father. That is not "motherhood", it is "parenthood". Unless it's all about single women bringing their babies up alone? I saw no reference to that in TFA. It's a bit like craftsman vs craftsperson, not that I really wanted to go there. But there are real reasons for using more inclusionary terms even when the traditional "feel more natural" (to the speaker / author) or whatever.
      - brownbat 8y ago
        > breastfed... is ideal whenever possible The AAP and WHO both endorse this position, and I can't find a reputable leading health org that argues otherwise. The more I read about the basis of the claim though the more confused I get. Parenting advice sites all point out that it helps child immunity. But the underlying studies are based on the ingestion of immunoglobulin, which doesn't even survive digestion. So essentially it protects the esophagus against waterborne illnesses, ie, mainly those no longer common in the developed world. That definitely makes sense in terms of evolutionarily-relevant child mortality threats, but that context is always omitted. Or you get claims of improved cognition, then find meta-analysis that can't reproduce any results after five years. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/03/23/peds.2016-1848 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/03/... https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/04/the-case-against-breast-feeding/307311/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/04/the-cas... Parenting guidance seems full of replication crisis issues, even in the medical literature. That's been the most eye opening thing about becoming a parent... people's strong interest in parenting makes it hard to explain the poor state of the data on the topic.
        kaitai 8y ago
        That's not the whole story (re: immunoglobulin). You're right in broad-brush strokes. The abstract at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12850343 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12850343 has some quick notes on the broader context. For immunoglobulin in particular, when you say "doesn't survive digestion," you're missing the substantial amounts of IgA (ok, milk sIgA) in the intestine. There it will bind with lots of bad stuff, preventing said bad stuff from causing an immune response. (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257684/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257684/ is one place to read about this.) You also must consider all the leukocytes in breast milk. Both maternal and infant infections cause huge increases in leukocyte production. There is a theory (hard to test) that babies like to stick their hands in mom's mouth while breastfeeding so that mom gets baby germs, and then mom will make appropriate leukocytes. Bizarrely, baby backwash (into the breast! while feeding!) also leads to maternal immunological response. Fun fact: breast milk from the same mom can vary in color dramatically (from blue to white to yellow) and a lot of that has to do with the contents, with yellow in particular generally having a high leukocyte content.
- hueving 8y ago
  I don't need to lactate to take my kid to the park without judgment.
- andrepd 8y ago
  Name one thing, apart from breastfeeding, that men can't do that women can, when it comes to taking care of a child. Why is it, then, that it's still "unmanly" to change diapers, or god forbid, even be a stay-at-home dad?
  - kaitai 8y ago
    I have to add that because dad can't lactate, he's developed more sophisticated strategies for dealing with infant discontent than this mom :)
  - Retric 8y ago
    Take care of an infant while recovering from birth without taking extra time of. That's not a huge difference, but it is economically significant for many couples especially when they have physically demanding jobs.
    - watwut 8y ago
      The recovery period after birth is not that long. It can be anything between few days and two months, but not much more.
- zasz 8y ago
  Nonsense. My sister-in-law is a professor and my brother is the stay-at-home dad, for the sake of her career. They're on kid #2 now. He does all the nighttime stuff so she can sleep and be refreshed for work.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
kolpa 8y ago
Who is saying "women having it all" and not "men having it all" ?
- girvo 8y ago
  The bulk of mainstream media. A quick google will show that, though interestingly it also shows some newer articles raising the same point as the GP there.
bonniemuffin 8y ago
I think it's mostly because, in a very real sense, men have always been able to have it all. Men have always been able to have children and a career (because their wives stayed home to raise them!), so the quote isn't as poignant for them. BUT -- I do think it's actually useful to talk about "parents having it all", because all those breadwinner men with stay-at-home wives missed out on a lot of quality bonding time with their kids. They may have thought they had it all, but they actually missed out on developing real, meaningful relationships with their kids.
- pbhjpbhj 8y ago
  It sounds like you've completely misunderstood the aphorism "raising kids and a having a career". It's not the state of being a biological parent that's sought after (which yes parents have automatically) but of _raising_ children. You can't raise children in absentia. If you're concentrating on your career you simply can't dedicate yourself to raising children. So, no fathers haven't always had it all because having it all is a practical impossibility in almost all walks of life.
  - bonniemuffin 8y ago
    I think you and I are saying exactly the same thing here. That's exactly what I meant by "they actually missed out on developing real, meaningful relationships with their kids."

Avshalom 8y ago

Did you read the article? because it is very clearly about historical books explicitly about mothers. If you want ~100CE greek doctors to be more inclusive you're gonna need a time machine.

craftyguy 8y ago
I think GP would like that to change, hence his comment.. You don't have to change history (lol) like you suggest to do that.
- sundvor 8y ago
  Precisely, thanks.

iends 8y ago

Reminds me of the onsies that have arrows for head, arms, etc and say “You can do this Dad”

xevb3k 8y ago

Parenthood, particularly in some communities is like entering some kind of twilight zone. In particular I’ve been shocked at how many fathers do almost nothing in terms of childcare. It’s a shame that there isn’t a more general expectation on fathers to look after their kids at least to some extent, and that not looking after your kids isn’t considered socially unacceptable. I don’t believe this is just the fault of “men”, but I think it comes from a surprising lack on understanding in terms of how much work looking after kids is. It’s pretty much a 16 hour a day job for the first few years. If you don’t have someone to help it’s almost unbearable.

darkerside 8y ago
It's unfortunately understandable that this behavior would evolve, culturally if not biologically. Because of our reproductive systems, men are incentivized to play the numbers game and women to invest in created offspring. That said, I agree it's a shame when it actually plays out that way and our society as a whole (and even fathers in modern society) lose out.
- rdlecler1 8y ago
  There’s an evolutionary underpinning driving a statistical difference in rearing behavior of males and females. You’d expect mothers to always commit more resources to their children because (1) eggs are expensive and spermm is cheap and the number or progeny is limited (2) high cuckolding rates also imply that men will hedge by spending less resources on their family. (3) Males may take a different strategy that contributes to the family which involve risk taking and high mortality rates (there’s no free lunch).
- KirinDave 8y ago
  > It's unfortunately understandable that this behavior would evolve, culturally if not biologically. Because of our reproductive systems, men are incentivized to play the numbers game and women to invest in created offspring. Fathers have multiple physical adaptations for fatherhood that are very important. The idea that fathers experience no hormonal or physical changes is not scientific. Much like mothers, though, if they remove themselves from the proximity of their children these effects cease.