5 ms·

This is a result of our modern attitudes toward marriage and child rearing. Back in "the day" couples weren't expected to become practically one person. It wa

This is a result of our modern attitudes toward marriage and child rearing. Back in "the day" couples weren't expected to become practically one person. It was expected that the commitments required of marriage and raising kids could take a back seat a couple times a week for men to hang out with their friends. So when one person got married or had a kid they would still show up on the regular and the friendships and friend groups would survive because that wouldn't interrupt the friendship. There are no more hours available in the day or week than there were back then so when we prioritize something we inherently de-prioritize other things.

em-bee 4y ago
i am not sure those days where really better. wasn't the reality that men could do this because they were the head of the household and not involved with their kids at all? i am sorry, but that does not sound appealing to me at all. there is no reason why families can't socialize together and allow building friendships within that group
- thisarticle 4y ago
  That’s hyperbole though isn’t it? Like no one is saying men should abandon their families, only that maybe they shouldn’t have to dedicate so much of their time to family to not be viewed as a deadbeat.
  - em-bee 4y ago
    a deadbead dad doesn't even provide for the family. that's different. i mean this: https://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/o-t-lounge/are-modern-fathers-spending-too-much-time-with-their-kids/88306612/ https://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/o-t-lounge/are-modern-fa... the average mother spent 54 minutes a day caring for children in 1965 but 104 minutes in 2012. Men do less than women, but far more than men in the past: their child-caring time has jumped from 16 minutes a day to 59.
    - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
      You're just arguing over language to avoid addressing the question. Imagine he said "bad parent" instead of "deadbeat". Also, per the numbers time spent caring for children has tripled since the 60s and child rearing outcomes don't seem better at the same time as women have entered the workforce. Since society didn't also invent some magic stimulants that reduce sleep requirements in that time that's a bad deal no matter how you look at it. We're wasting more time to get the same amount done.
      - em-bee 4y ago
        how do you make the connection that childrearing didn't get better since women entered the workforce? according to those statistics, women doubled the time they spend with kids. seems that working didn't make a difference. i don't know what that means though. either women were already working in the 60's or while they were at home they did many other things besides taking care of the children. (i suppose some housework got more efficient thanks to technical advances)

em-bee 4y ago

i am not sure those days where really better. wasn't the reality that men could do this because they were the head of the household and not involved with their kids at all? i am sorry, but that does not sound appealing to me at all. there is no reason why families can't socialize together and allow building friendships within that group

thisarticle 4y ago
That’s hyperbole though isn’t it? Like no one is saying men should abandon their families, only that maybe they shouldn’t have to dedicate so much of their time to family to not be viewed as a deadbeat.
- em-bee 4y ago
  a deadbead dad doesn't even provide for the family. that's different. i mean this: https://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/o-t-lounge/are-modern-fathers-spending-too-much-time-with-their-kids/88306612/ https://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/o-t-lounge/are-modern-fa... the average mother spent 54 minutes a day caring for children in 1965 but 104 minutes in 2012. Men do less than women, but far more than men in the past: their child-caring time has jumped from 16 minutes a day to 59.
  - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
    You're just arguing over language to avoid addressing the question. Imagine he said "bad parent" instead of "deadbeat". Also, per the numbers time spent caring for children has tripled since the 60s and child rearing outcomes don't seem better at the same time as women have entered the workforce. Since society didn't also invent some magic stimulants that reduce sleep requirements in that time that's a bad deal no matter how you look at it. We're wasting more time to get the same amount done.
    - em-bee 4y ago
      how do you make the connection that childrearing didn't get better since women entered the workforce? according to those statistics, women doubled the time they spend with kids. seems that working didn't make a difference. i don't know what that means though. either women were already working in the 60's or while they were at home they did many other things besides taking care of the children. (i suppose some housework got more efficient thanks to technical advances)