Hyerdahl3 wrote:
> >Subject: Re: Providing Studies: Re: Why do men sink to the bottom?
> >From: "Ben" ArGee45{at}hotmail.com
> >Date: 2/5/2005 7:29 AM Pacific Standard Time
> >Message-id: 
> >
> >
> >Hyerdahl3 wrote:
> >> >ubject: Re: Providing Studies: Re: Why do men sink to the bottom?
> >> >From: "Ben" ArGee45{at}hotmail.com
> >> >Date: 2/4/2005 3:07 PM Pacific Standard Time
> >> >Message-id:

> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Hyerdahl3 wrote:
> >> >> >Subject: Re: Why do men sink to the bottom?
> >> >> >From: "Ben" ArGee45{at}hotmail.com
> >> >> >Date: 2/4/2005 10:24 AM Pacific Standard Time
> >> >> >Message-id:
> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Heidi Graw wrote:
> >> >> >> >"USA" 
wrote in message
> >> >> >>
>news:5sm401psuhvgg68d84dmnhudn5shdqimjb{at}4ax.com...
> >> >> >> > >On 03 Feb 2005 06:40:35 GMT,
hyerdahl3{at}aol.com
(Hyerdahl3)
> >> >wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> Plus, there was a study a few years back showing that>girlsfrom
> >single> female headed homes were more successful.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > By all means, produce this "study."
> >> >>
> >> >> http://www.virginia.edu/insideuva/2000/09/hetherington.html
> >> >
> >> >450 families, eh?  And if I can find 450 families in which
divorce>wreaked
> havoc on the children, would that offset this one?
>
> No.  Each study, is about something different.  This particular one
shows the
> effects of a single mom family on girls as it relates to their
success.  That
> is a specific criteria.  So, if I'm a mom and my goal is to raise
succesful
> daughers, I might want to consider that.

And other studies have shown that children from single mother families
consistently fare worse than those from two-parent families.  Further,
I suspect I've had a little more real world experience with this than
you.

>
> Because>I'm>pretty sure that anyone who even casually glances around
can find
> >that>450 families.
>
> Well, it won't matter tho, Ben because each study measures something
different.
> For example, most studies that appear to blame single moms, don't
measure the
> effects of poverty.

How so?  Much of what I've read controlled for everything except the
presence of a father in the home.

>
> >> >Given the breadth and depth of broken families in this country,
and
> >the>> >resultant social pathologies that we know are occuring, a
study
> with>only 450 families isn't representative.
>
> It will due to measure successful girls of single moms until
something better
> comes along, Ben.  :-)

Not really, because it's being presented as more representative than it
really is.  Now, having said that, I can agree with some of its
premises, especially about some children being resilient and getting
past the trauma.  But I can guarantee you that even those children have
gaps in their lives because of the absence of a father.

So the question becomes, are those children better off with those gaps
than they would have been with a dysfunctional father?  For some, the
answer is yes.  For others, no.

> >> >>
> >> >> =B7 Boys are rarely enhanced by divorce. However, some girls,
like
> their>> mothers, become exceptionally confident and competent
after>divorce.
> >> >
> Well, I've been saying right along that boys are at more risk
in>single>mother
> >> families than girls.  I did notice that the article didn't do>much
> >more than> make a slight reference to this.
> >>
>  I'm ok with acknowledging that boys don't do as well.  All
children>benefit
> >by
> >> having more (rather than less) people to love them.
> >
> >Someone who didn't spend as much time as I have discussing these
things
> >with you might almost think this is a reasonble statement on your
part.
> > :)  But I know that what you're refering to is counting cousins and
uncles
> and giving them as much value as dads who live in the home.
> >
> Ah, but we don't delegate custody based on having a parent with a
penis in >the
> home; courts look at the totality of the circumstances to consider
the best
> interests of the child.

No, they usually side with the mother.

> >> >
>  Here's another talking about both sexes:
> >> >>
> The article:  Fatherless Homes Aren't Barrier to Kid's
Success>by>Suzanne
>  Leigh>> published in the British journal, New Scientist
> >> >
> >> >That link didn't come through.
> >>
> >> Sorry.
> >> >
> > Also, folks keep asking about another study regarding men lying
> >more,> >so while> I was going thru my files, I located that article
as well.
> >> >>
>  The article entitled "Fathers Lie More, Queen's Study Says" from
> >The >Kingston>> Whig Standard dated Thurs. May 27th, 1999.
> >> >>
> >> >> Here's a blurb from that one:
> >> >>
> >"A study suggests a third of unproven cases of child abuse stemming
> >from> custody battles involve some deliberate lying in court.
> >Researchers> >at Queens> University law faculty are also suggesting
that while
> >mothers make> >allegations of child abuse more often than men during
custody
> >battles, fathers >are more>> likely to fabricate the accusations
than mothers
> are".>Hmmmmm
> >> >
> So an article in, what, a magazine or newspaper says that "studies
suggest"?
> >>
>  Sure.  The cites can be obtained from writing to the
article>publisher I
> >> gather, if you're that interested.
> >>
>  Reporters are notoriously inaccurate in
summarizing>research>findings (though>
> they're slightly more reliable than feminists).
> >>
>  Yeah, those jabs are just about all your good for here.
> >
> >Hey, at least mine are right up front.   :)   I don't sneak around
and>say
> things like "suzie striptease" and make snarky references to
golf>courses.
>
> Well, you have your chance, if you like to find out more.  I'm
satisfied with
> the article.
> If you find out more, do let me know.  :-)

I don't think I'll bother, given your past record of ignoring material
I've supplied you.  :)  Besides, USA gave you several cites--did you go
and read them?

>
> >And yes, articles can be innacurate, which is why you are free to
research the
> accuracy if>you so>> choose.
> >
> >What, you want me to do your homework for you?   lol
>
> No;  I'm not the one who is unsatisfied, Ben.

lol  Don't recognize one of your own favorite phrases?

>
> >"Studies suggest" is really another term for "this
study>can't>measure".
> >> >
> >So you say, and yet meninist also have provided articles saying the
> >same >thing,>> so if you don't like the generality feel free to
delve deeper.
> >
> >To be fair, I always prefer to have the study itself in front
of>me...or at
> least a competent, fair peer review.  But I'm still not>doing your
homework for
> you.  :)
>
> I'm not the one in need of proof, Ben.  Physician, heal thyself.

I'm not in need of proof either, Hy.  I know what I know, and I know
what I see.

> >
> > >Besides, you got anything from *this* country?
> >>
> >> I don't NEED anything else.
> >
> >Now come on, you just got done giving USA shit for producing
something
> >from Norway.  At least live up to the standards you demand from
others.
>
> Actually, someone had asked me for the cite so I provided it.    And
the study
> you were unable to get,
s still a valid study whether or not you can get it
> on the net.
> >
>  Perhaps you have something suggesting that women> lie more about
these
> matters.  :-)
> >
> >Sure.  Take a look at the CANOW family court "study" that you
yourself
> >trumpeted here, until it was so badly debunked that even you
distanced
> >yourself from it.
>
> I don't know much about the CANOW family report.

Bullshit  lol.   You were all over that one until it got trashed.

>  But in the end, one study
> will do until another comes along, eh?

No, it won't, actually.  A bad study is not a substitute for no study
at all.  Especially when radical groups are trying to make policy based
on these deceitful studies.

> >> >>
> >> >>  What were these girls allegedly "more
successful" at?
> >Having"more">>  fatherless babies?  Being
prostitutes?  Being drug
addicts
> >and/or>>alcoholics?
> >> >>
> >> It is more likely that more boys from father only homes tend to
have
> >trouble> with drugs and alcohol, much like fathers more than
mothers,
> >themselves.
> >> >> >>
>  At having the confidence instilled by a single mom and uncomplicated
> >> >by a> sexist dad?
> >> >
> >> >Have you ever seen how many successful young women thank their
> >fathers>for>> teaching them how to be confident and go
for what they
want?
> Quite>a
> >few.
> >> >
> >> Sure, but not from SEXIST fathers, eh?
> >
> >Already addressed all this in another post.
> >
> ????  Sexist fathers aren't worth shit to daughters.

And sexist mothers aren't worth shit to sons.  Given the overall
climate, maybe we want to start studying this.  I remember one episode
of Fear Factor that had parent/child teams.  One mother said to her
daughter just before a stunt, "We like making boys cry, don't we?"
They went on to lose...to a boy.   :)

>
> >  I don't know what study Hyerdahl is refering to, but I
do>know>positive>
> >> parenting style does help children to be more successful socially
and
> >> academically.  It is the *parenting skill*, whether single,
> >> >married,> >rich or> poor, that determines the
outcome of the
> >children.
> >> >>
> >> >> I tend to agree with that.  Non-sexist fathers can be just as
good
> >at>>parenting> as non-sexist mothers.
> >> >
> >Men and women ring different parenting styles to the table.
> >>
> >> Bulldroppings.
> >
> >Not at all.  Even a sexist like you should realize that men and
women
> >approach the challenge of raising kids from different perspectives.
>
> Not by what's between their legs, they don't.  :-)  Parenting styles
differ
> from parent to parent, but not based on having a penis vs a vagina.

Men and women are different, Hy, whether you like it or not.  They
approach life differently, and parent differently.  I'm surprised I
have to point out this fundamental knowledge to you (pssst--gender
differences are NOT solely social constructs).

> >
> >>  When the men in WWI, WWII, Korea and VietNam were killed in wars,
women
> raised the kids as both mother and father.  No one seemed>to be
kicking them in
> the shorts back then.
> >
> >Well, the reasons those families were fatherless/husbandless were a
> >little different, don't you think?
>
> The results would be the same tho.  A fatherless child is still
fatherless
> whether the father decides by dying in war or whether the mother
decides by
> divorce.

I was talking about whether society would frown on these single mother
families.

>
>  And, it still doesn't mean that the
> >kids didn't suffer from a lack of a loving father in their lives.
>
> In life, pain is mandatory; suffering is optional.  And the studies I
looked >at
> were much more specitif than merely generalizing about 'suffering'.
They
> considered specific harms and 'success'.
>
> I think>exposing the child(ren) to both is in their ultimate
best>interests.
> >>
>  Like many other best interests, that totally depends on
the>circumstances.  I
> >> had a childhood friend whose father was an alcoholic;  it would
have
> >been better for her if he had returned to Mars.
> >
> >Any time I say children benefit most from two parents, it assumes
two
> >*good* parents; I can find families that would be better off without
the
> mothers in them, if we're going to qualify everything like that.
> >
> That's just the thing, Ben, courts can't generalize about fathers of
>individual
> children when they determine custody/visitation issues.  They MUST
look at
> specifice and in those specifics some parent are operating in the
child's
> interests while others are not.

There are other things in children's lives besides court, Hy--surely
you recognize that.

>
> Across the board, children in intact families are doing
better>than>children>
> not in one.
> >>
>  We don't tend to assign custody or even visitation based on "accross
> >the board"> statistics that don't take the circumstances of
individual
> children
> >into> consideration.  AND, it has been held that even comparing two
parent
> >families with single mom families that girls often are more
competent being
> >raised by> single moms.  I find that ....interesting.
> >
> >So it's gone from "sugesting" that girls benefit "a
bit more" to
being>"held"
> that "girls often are"?  Again, you seem to have forgotten
the>numbers of girls
> who have thanked their fathers.
>
> For non-sexist fathers, sure.  Sexism only harms girls.
>
> >>  Of course a positive parenting style will
help.>A>positive>>parenting style
>  with both parents in the home helps the>most.
> >>
> >> We don't assign custody or even visitation on what Ben thinks
"helps
> >the >most".
> >
> >We apparently don't assign it based on reality, either.
>
> Sure we do.  The reality of each unique situation.  More and more,
courts are
> looking at the effects parents have on children when they aren't

--- PCBoard (R) v15.3/M 100