leaving children for 6 months

Person_one

sassyblue wrote: »

It's nowhere even close to misandrous. l agree with seanymph, women are instinctive nuturers and are better at understanding children than men are, it's something that is primal. Operating machinery and driving cars is incomparible.

Don't be daft, its conditioning. Men are more than capable of being loving and nurturing if encouraged and allowed, its just a shame they aren't encouraged and allowed more often.

StumpyPumpy

sassyblue wrote: »

It's nowhere even close to misandrous. l agree with seanymph, women are instinctive nuturers and are better at understanding children than men are, it's something that is primal. Operating machinery and driving cars is incomparible.

Rubbish. Complete and total drivel. You may dream of spending your time pregnant and being the sole care giver to an ever increasing brood as some sort of supermum, but it is no more primal than liking shoes. It is an ill-conceived stereotype. Nothing more.

sassyblue

Person_one wrote: »

Don't be daft, its conditioning. Men are more than capable of being loving and nurturing if encouraged and allowed, its just a shame they aren't encouraged and allowed more often.

If you are assuming all men come from homes where that is not allowed you could be right..... assumptions don't count though.

euronorris

It's not just homes though Sassy. It's society in general.

sassyblue

StumpyPumpy wrote: »

Rubbish. Complete and total drivel. You may dream of spending your time pregnant and being the sole care giver to an ever increasing brood as some sort of supermum, but it is no more primal than liking shoes. It is an ill-conceived stereotype. Nothing more.

And where did l say that? :rotfl:

Some of you are frothing at the mouth today.... :rotfl:

quantumleap

I think that a lot of quite general comments about "men" are beginning to creep into this thread and to be honest, as a man myself :cool:, I'm not sure that it is really appropriate.

As I've stated before I have three young kids and (I hope my wife would agree) I've got a pretty good, strong relationship with each of them. If they are excited or upset they'll come to me as often as they would my wife. I tell them I love them every morning and every night (and perhaps a little in between!) and more than that, I try to show them as often as possible how much I love them. My wife has been away for two long weekends with friends this year and none of the children have met any (serious;)) harm. We've all got on swimmingly!


BUT... I couldn't do it for more than a week (maybe two) on my own. I'm not afraid to admit it, my wife is essential. She IS better at comforting them, appeasing them, dressing them than me. I'm not bad at it but she is better. She is more patient with them than me, she gets less stressed around them than me. She listens, I hear! Although I'm working on that!!


Now I'm not a bad dad - in fact I think I'm a good dad and I'm not saying that all men are the same, but I think that most would understand where I'm coming from.

onlyroz

Well I'm not going to wade through all 21 pages, but I think I get the general gist.

I can't comment on the OP's particular circumstances, but I do think that if certain conditions are met then it would be fine to pursue a career opportunity for 6 months leaving your children in the care of a capable partner.

However, it is not something to be decided on willy-nilly. Care needs to be taken that this is a genuine career opportunity, and thought needs to be made for what to expect once the 6 months are up. Woud you expect to receive a full-time offer of employment after the 6 months, and what then would you do about the family situation? What about your existing position? Can it be held open for this time, or are there other better jobs that you could walk into after gaining the new experience?

Regarding whether men are capable or as good as raising children on their own - of course they can be but it depends on the individual, and how the child-rearing responsibilities have been shared up to that point.

Seanymph

I've already explained this once, but it was many pages ago.

My OH was left to raise his children - aged 6, 8 and 13 when their mother died aged 36.

She had been the primary care giver (as in the OP's household) and he then took over.

Whether it is innate, taught, instinctive, conditioning - it makes no difference at all - I have now spent another five or six years co-parenting with him and those years made HUGE differences to the children and in more ways than the loss of their mother.

Men and women are different. They have different skillsets. They have different approaches and different ways of dealing with things.

Now you can say 'because he was raised in a society that encouraged him not to show emotion but encouraged a woman in the 1970's to he is repressed'. Or you can just say 'as a fella he finds it harder to deal with children's emotions in a supportive way'.

I don't care about the reasoning and it's not relevant.

He and I have very different skillsets - as did me and my ex and me and every other fella I've come across.

Barking about 'equality' doesn't make people equal in all things - education went to a 'flat level' approach and is only now dragging back to approaching boys and girls differently because it is now accepted that they are very different beings, with very different skillsets and different learning styles. They need teaching in different ways to ensure a fair outcome.

Men and women are different. Anyone who things that difference is purely physical is welcome to their viewpoint - but equality is about opportunity, not denying fundamental differences.

Now they may be social rather than psychological - or physical - they may be caused by opportunity or conditioning - but they are there.

To deny their existence is very short sighted indeed.

Until several months ago this woman was the primary carer for her children - she had that relationship with these young children.

I have seen, first hand, how the loss of a feminine influence in a household can affect children - and also how the responsibility whilst still trying to work and manage children single handedly affects their father.

I think that maintaining a household with the OP there whilst pursuing her dreams is something that could perhaps be looked at - there is always more than one way to advance a career and as that is what I feel I stand by what I said, this is about more than advancing a career, this is obviously about the appeal of being away from her family.

I think that being away from her family on a six month no physical contact basis will be detrimental to the children and her relationship with their father.

StumpyPumpy

sassyblue wrote: »

Originally Posted by StumpyPumpy
Rubbish. Complete and total drivel. You may dream of spending your time pregnant and being the sole care giver to an ever increasing brood as some sort of supermum, but it is no more primal than liking shoes. It is an ill-conceived stereotype. Nothing more.

And where did l say that? :rotfl:

Some of you are frothing at the mouth today.... :rotfl:

No, you didn't. I deliberately created a stereotypical image of a woman to emphasise my point that stereotypes such as the ones you are using against men are equally invalid.It looks like that went totally over your head, perhaps I shouldn't have expected anything more from a woman. (see what I've done there?) I suppose I'd better highlight the fact that I also made the same inference about shoes, in case you missed that too.

onlyroz

Seanymph - you can't take the case of your OH and extrapolate it to all men. *Some* men might struggle to raise a child on their own, but many others will be fine. The same applies equally to women.