RPGWW

(opinions only, no research done so don't take everything I said as well documented. It's all just my musings and insight.)

It's something that in our day and age we're often bombarded with. Mothers raising their children single-handledly or fathers being abusive to their childrend, or often having to play the bad guy that hands down cold-hard discipline. Something that is often heard is how important a father's role is in the development of a child. For sons, the father is a role-model on how to be a successful and responsible man. But what about their roles in the development of their daughters?

Fathers are often a girl's only image of what adult men are. Sometimes it is said that the type of men a girl is bound to date are directly related to the type of person her father is. Sometimes relationships mirror the kind they are raised under and sometimes women try to avoid the kind of relationship their parents have at all costs. So it seems fair to say that fathers are a very important-almost critical- part of how daughters learn to develop into partners and possibly mothers.

But a father's truly vital? Or can daughters be successfully raised in their abscence? Can a daughter raised only by her father learn to be a part of a healthy relationship? Or is the importance of a father figure in a develping female almost necessary in order for her to function in a two-sex world?

<p>

---

<div style="text-align:center">
Nekogami Character Pantheon--Deviant Art Gallery--LiveJournal</div>
<span style="font-size:xx-small;">Words to live by:
OMG PRIAM: ninja sex would be neither felt nor seen by either partner
OMG PRIAM: each would just suddenly need a smoke
Choark: Good luck there. You'll have to shit out darkness and send people into oblivion.</span></p>

No, fathers are not necessary to raise a healthy child. It is quite possible for a mother to raise a child by herself or for other extended family members to share in the responsibility.

However, fathers are arguably more important in the respect that they (hopefully) provide an addiitional dose of love and respect for a growing child that an 'extended' family member may not be able to provide qutie as well. A single parent, at times, may not be able to provide emotionally for a child, particularly if they are involved in high level jobs. In these cases, it always helps to have a father to provide these feelings in the mother's absence.

This is supported by the fact that mothers and fathers, over time, have developed into the position of easily interchangeable roles: the mother may be the breadwinner, and the father may be the stay-at-home-with-kid type.

Can't say that any of this is definite, especially given my lack of studies or references to papers, but this is what I believe. <p>

---

</p>

A lot of the whole "hay daughters learn ___ from fathers, ____ from mothers/ sons learn ____ from mothers, ____ from fathers" I'd say comes from back in the day of the traditional, nuclear family view. I mean, all wholesome families have 1 father, 1 mother, 2.2 kids and a pet dog, right?

Research has proven that kids grow up to be just as healthy, or just as dysfunctional, with nontraditional families--singles, same sex couples, et cetera--based on the ability or lack thereof of their guardians. Lots of research done about same sex couples, but a lot of folk like to ignore that stuff. Damn homo propaganda! *shakes fists!*

Funny thing is, the first person I "dated" turned out so much like my father it truly scares me. :[ Horrible experience.

I've heard that a woman's idea of attractiveness is "often" based upon her father, but mine leans more toward the traits of my brothers, where they overlap. You know, what with them being less fucktardy. It could have just as easily been, say, male friends, if they'd been more influential when I was younger, or role models from various media or whatnot. *shrugs* <p>

---

<div style="text-align:center">"Pantsare bad!!! We should wear pants only on our head you conformist bastard!!! Pants are the devils work!! Run freee!! And pantless!!!" -- Vulture</div></p>

Now, like I said, it's not a necessity, but it can help. Just as an example, I was raised mostly by a single mother. My biological father fled home, we fled a former guardian, and I spent those formative years without any sort of a real fatherly figure. The one fatherly figure that I did have... well, wasn't too fatherly. I still managed to develop well enough despite all of that, primarily because my mother, despite her current problems, was a responsible, hardworking individual.

I really haven't seen too much about homosexual parents, but from what I've read, those who are raised by gay parents as opposed to straight has an impact of nil.

The interesting part about siblings is that those who grow up with brothers or sisters tend to be, well, better social beings and have better understanding of shit. Possibly shit like that. :D <p>

---

</p>

I guess a question to be raised would be how does an unhealthy relationship with your father differ from an unhealthy relationship with your mother?

Does a cold, unemotional father teach daughters that all men are cold and distant? Do women gravitate towards these kinds of men in an effort for 'reform'? Would it be the same for a cold, unemotional mother?

As with all things it's dependent on the person but usually there's some kind of general trend. It's just interesting to me how easily an understanding between mother and daughters/father and sons can be but what about that cross gender relationship.

How does a mother/son relationship work? It seems to me that nowadays there's a kind of separation. It's okay for a girl to be a daddy's girl but it's not okay for a boy to be a momma's boy. Why?

For me, I do get jealous when I hear that other girls are daddy's girl. And I do fear to the point that I don't want to date at all the gravity my poor relationship with my father will have on my ability to be companion. But it's just wierd that one person, inadvertantly, can have such a powerful effect on how a person makes decisions.

How does the media and society affect parenting roles these days? <p>

---

<div style="text-align:center">
Nekogami Character Pantheon--Deviant Art Gallery--LiveJournal</div>
<span style="font-size:xx-small;">Words to live by:
OMG PRIAM: ninja sex would be neither felt nor seen by either partner
OMG PRIAM: each would just suddenly need a smoke
Choark: Good luck there. You'll have to shit out darkness and send people into oblivion.</span></p>

My thought is that any speculation about the psychological effect of childhood experience has to be tempered with the knowledge that humans are sentient creatures. This means that humans have choices as to the kind of person they become/the kind of people they enjoy.
To relate it to the topic at hand, childhood experiences have a strong impact on personality. Granted. However, I am of the opinion that individual choice is always a factor.

Example: My mother has been married to three different men. They were all very different. This means that depending on my formative stage, I had a totally different male authority figure. My mother wasn't much help, as she had her own problems to deal with. As a result, I made rules for my behavior that made sense to me. Personal choice. It happens.

A lot of developmental psychology tends to ignore independent thought as a potential influence, but once children reach a certain age it's always an option. Not all people choose that option for whatever reason, but it's still there. <p>-------------------------
Wise man say, "forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."

"It's like that old Scandinavian saying. You can lead a herring to water, but you have to walk real fast or you'll DIE."
--Rose:The Golden Girls</p>

My mother is on her fifth marriage. I've had MANY MANY men trying to be fathers in my life, or large gaps where there was no such man.

I don't think it's necessary. I think it's nice to have TWO positive role models. And if the father is around, that the relationship be a good one so they'll see how to model a good relationship. But necessary for a healthy image? I don't think so. It's just extra enforcement.

Then on the flipside, I did establish a good relationship with hubby 4 and he is by all means my father. So even when he wasn't living with my mother, I've still got a really strong relationship with him. So maybe less a father, and at least A VERY STRONG male rolemodel. Perhaps another alternative family member.

As for relationship modeling, it doesn't have to be the parents. Obviously I stive to not follow in my mom's footsteps, but I look very closely to my grandparent's 50+ marriage. Now that's devotion. <p><div style="text-align:center">!</div></p>

An interesting topic, to be sure! I'm curious to see where we end up with this one.

Can a daughter be raised successfully by a single parent? Yes, of course. But it's a little harder, so I wouldn't advise it. Reguardless of what psychobabble or logic you apply to the argument, the fact is that a lot of our social behavoir as adults is adapted from our first social experiments and discoveries during childhood. And who do children hang out with the most? That's right, their families. In my opinion, children who grow up with both parents and a sibiling or two generally grow up to be more socially well-adjusted. Or maybe I just think that way because I'm an only child. Not all geeks and introverts are only children, and not all only children are geeks and introverts. Some are actually extroverts. But whatever the stuation, generally, children who lack parents, good parents, or sibilings, generally seek to make up for it with something else; be it escapism or extroversion or introversion or extracurricular activities or sex or drugs or whatever. It doesn't all have to be bad, though. If I had had a brother or a sister, I'd probably be a more outgoing, well-adjusted member of society, but by the same token, I'd probably have been part of the crown in high school that wasn't comfortable hanging out with Pervy, which means he might never have discovered anime, and I might never have discovered RPGWW, which means I probably wouldn't have met Alexis. Then again, if I weren't as big a geek as I am, would we have even hit it off so well anyway? Who knows. I'd probably be less lazy and actually have a semi-decent job by now, but I don't think I'd be as interesting a person. *shrugs*

This is some deep shit, man.

Oh yea, I almost forgot to comment on Kai's and Lex's posts. Moreso Kai's. You'll notice neither of them place a great deal of importance on the role of the parents, and favor the role of the individual to make choices. However, they both come from complicated family histories involving multiple marriages. Such relationships are generally hard on children, but they provide an interesting background for discussions like this because such people kind of exist on both sides of the fence simultaneously. They have a mom and a dad, but they also have multiples of one or the other, or perhaps both, and thus even with parents, they don't really have a solid, consistent "role model" or "mentor" to grow from. Such children are presented with options... generally, they either become "dominant" — self-sufficent and self-reliant — because they can't rely on others, or they become clingy and submissive and generally try to do whatever they can to keep people in their lives.

Of course, I'm no psychologist, nor a sociologist, nor an anthropologist, so I could just be blowing smoke out my ass. <p><div style="text-align:center"></div></p>

I'm taking the personal choice stance in part because I'm trying to avoid the very Freudian "I'm sarcastic because I wasn't breastfed long enough as a child" explanations.

I don't necessarily hold with birth order/number of siblings as an indicator of how well-adjusted children are likely to be. I can't use myself as an example for the birth order refutations, because I can't ethically accept myself as the norm. I don't even know how many siblings I have, so we'll leave me out of it. ^_^ However, from what I've observed in the few people I know who do fall into typical sibling patterns, their parents fall into typical mistakes that come with having lots of kids.

On the other hand (and here's where I destroy my own argument for giggles) the birth order stereotypes are like cliches of any other kind. They're cliche for a reason.

What this means is that I can see the arguments for both sides of the sibling issue, but I always try to err on the side of free will, since it's something everyone can exercise if they choose and it does change things when it comes into play. <p>-------------------------
Wise man say, "forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."

"It's like that old Scandinavian saying. You can lead a herring to water, but you have to walk real fast or you'll DIE."
--Rose:The Golden Girls</p>

A lot of behavior is also adapted from your peers. Remember that your 'looking-glass concept' is derived from other people's viewpoint on you, and this same concept can go on to effect you later in life. Familial experiences alone can help develop a base, but other people can embellish it. Or something like that.

Also, yeah. The thing about psychology is that there are so many theories. Many of those theories (particularly Freud's) are somewhat outdated and/or in need of further work. However, some of Freud's findings have been useful, so it's best to work with a patchwork of ideas from dispararate theories as opposed to focusing on one alone.

Oh, and, yes, birth order is a flawed concept which I believe lacks any backing. <p>

---

</p>

Birth order theories make sense, but only when all other variables are 'normal.' I.e. heterosexual parents who are both present, 1.2 siblings, pet dog/cat, suburbian living, that kind of shit.

I will agree that the father does not necessarily have to be the male role model and dating archetype for daughters. My sister, particularly, has noticed that she tends to date guys who are in some way like *me,* which is moderately distressing but makes sense: In our childhoods, we often saw Dad lose his temper and yell and whathaveyou, and we both *really* did not like that. So she looked to me, always calm, curious, geeky--and apparently I became a role model for her, despite our ages only being separated by 2.5 years.

Me, on the other hand? I don't know where to go with this, because I've identified as asexual, and aside have only really dated one woman. All I know is that I could never really see myself with a woman who is blonde (I've never really know that many blonde people except for shitty preppy bitches, no offense to any blonde people here), but that's easily enough explained away by my Czech heritage and thus, brown-haired family.

Part of me sees the "daughters seek guys who are like their father" bit and says, hey, so THAT's why women seem to like assholes.

Also, remind me to discuss the Free Will thing in another thread sometime. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

PapaTymisonn: *feeling inarticulate* The world needs fathers, but I suck at saying why...
BrainWalkr: The world needs fathers because mothers are too empathetic.
PapaTymisonn: ... well, that... and I've gotten to the point where I'm decrying loveless sex.
BrainWalkr: What's that got to do with a father figure, specifically?
PapaTymisonn: Sex + Love = Foundation for a successful family...
BrainWalkr: Oh, I see what you're getting at now
BrainWalkr: There's a lot more single moms than there are single dads.
PapaTymisonn: That's because single moms are far easier to make than single dads.
PapaTymisonn: It's a rarity for a mother to leave her child due to that initial bond that only mother and child can make.
PapaTymisonn: But dads don't always make that connection, or aren't told they are a father, or worse, don't care.
BrainWalkr: *nod* Yea. I understand the "whys" on that one, but the bearing that sort of situation has on society's overall view of the importance of the father figure is a much grayer area.
PapaTymisonn: Yeah. I know. I need to get back to my point.
PapaTymisonn: Which is this, I guess... the only reason men aren't being fathers is because of their own cowardice mixed with a society that allows them to run from their responsibility (if not fiscal, emotional). Which means that they're intended to be there. Call it genetics or God or what have you, fathers are SUPPOSED to be part of the family. Which begs me to believe that they're an important part of any child's life, male or female and I want to post this convo.
PapaTymisonn: o.o
BrainWalkr: Heh. Go ahead!
BrainWalkr: It seems society's pre-formulated roles for family members is a topic that has been mentioned but not acutely discussed yet.
PapaTymisonn: (gimme a sec, typing out a big thought)
BrainWalkr: k
PapaTymisonn: Yes! I know a father figure is not important for a Galapagos turtle, because not a SINGLE THING keeps them around. Not even the MOTHER sticks around. There's nothing that motivates a cohesive family unit. But we are a species that, for the most part, bonds with our mate (most times for life), and bonds with our child in a different, but equally solid way. We are one of few species that even embraces monogamy! But why are we even questioning the role of the father? The same reason we gained superiority on earth without being particularly strong or vicious. We think. We HAVE reason. We have the faculties to go against our nature, to rise above our impulses. I don't doubt that they're a good thing (they allowed the invention of the computer, which allows me to go off about this at all), but they also allow us to do harm as well as good. Pollution comes to mind. As does the popularity of Britney Spears.

The point is, there are times when nature and reason must be obeyed, whether independently, or in tandem. Fatherhood, that scary eighteen year old commitment, is a time when nature is and should be boss. Because frankly, it's how things SHOULD be.
BrainWalkr: Plus, you know, humans have among the most dependant infants in the animal kingdom. A newborn baby can't do a single goddamned thing for itself, and it'll be years before it has enough mental and physical capacity to fend for itself in any way. That's a big responsibility, and quite a burden on just one parent. If nothing else, it should be the father's job to help the mother out with the responsibility of mantaining the life he helped create.

... but somehow I think we're getting a little off the topic of the thread here... not that this isn't interesting discussion.
PapaTymisonn: A little. But close enough. Post now?
BrainWalkr: Probably! Because I'm hungry.
PapaTymisonn: Kay.

EDIT: *sees if just editing it will set it to the new icon*

EDIT2: Darn. Well, someone delete this post, and I'll be glad to repost what I said. <p>--------------------
UT! No complaining! If you didn't want to be slaves, you should have told your parents to put up a less pitiful defense against the TIK'LA! Mm? Did any of you do that? I didn't think so...

-Bob the Angry Flower</p>Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=kingofdoma>KingOfDoma</A] at: 4/18/05 21:20

Whoever broke this thread is dying. <p>

---

<div style="text-align:center"></div>

</p>

On Firefox, Cha's personal icon doesn't show up all absurd-like. On IE, it doesn't show up at all.

Which reminds me, Cha, you may wish to set it back to normal. It's still -there- and whatnot. <p>

---

<div style="text-align:center">"Pantsare bad!!! We should wear pants only on our head you conformist bastard!!! Pants are the devils work!! Run freee!! And pantless!!!" -- Vulture</div></p>Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=pdrydia>pd]&nbsp; at: 4/18/05 21:09

So, I'm wondering... Would it be safe to say that a 'father' perse is not necessary but a male of some kind would be?

How would a child develop if grown in a one gender core society (family structure) as opposed to a mixed one? I guess it might make a guy in predominately female environment grow to be more in touch with his emotions and feelings as opposed to it. Though it seems to me once got out into society he'd be ostracized or negatively judge (possibly labeled as gay whether he was or wasn't). The same for girls. It's almost as if family serves to perpetuate some stereotypes but that makes since sense a family is a mini-society affected by the macro-society.

Which is scary because what does the spell for today's families? <p>

---

<div style="text-align:center">
Nekogami Character Pantheon--Deviant Art Gallery--LiveJournal</div>
<span style="font-size:xx-small;">Words to live by:
OMG PRIAM: ninja sex would be neither felt nor seen by either partner
OMG PRIAM: each would just suddenly need a smoke
Choark: Good luck there. You'll have to shit out darkness and send people into oblivion.</span></p>