The point is well taken here...and raises a question that will infuriate feminists. If a united team of mother and father is not available...could it be that it is the MOTHER who is less necessary for all but the very youngest children and should our family court system actually be directing children to live with their FATHERS so they learn to be adults rather than coddling and infantilizing mothers?
Fairy tails have women spiking their finger, finding their prince, working their way out of a well, finding their voice, restoring their hands or legs.
These all symbolise integrating the masculine.
Masculine faculties include discerning categories, planning, discipline, routine, universal morality, precise language, truthful language, boundary settings, mastering the environment and changing it.
Girls must integrate the masculine to prepare for motherhood. The female life stages being maiden under fathers protection. Motherhood under husbands protection. And matriarch where her need for protection has expired due to her ovarian reserve being gone.
The need for protection due to being able to raise children, but not alone, allows women to avoid moral development.
If a girl must make a resource allocation decision between a) difficult moral character development, and b) beautification and care skills. She gains nothing by prioritising the former. Her eggs deplete daily either way.
But by making herself attractive and a capable carer, she can better secure a husband who will protect her, and fertilise her eggs. Supplying her with protection and provisions she needs to gestate and raise infants with capable care.
Men on the other hand must compete in the physical world and have no choice but to invest in personal reinvention to climb the moral development scale.
How else would men be able to negotiate mating rights and a dowry for to be accepted to promote a maiden to matrimonium (the office of motherhood)?
Assuming all the responsibility for her protection and provision while also offering paternal inputs to the children.
I can mother, or father, but not bothered at once.
Consider how a father blocks the exit by default, but if he's not around the mother picks up that role. Either way, kids get physical barrier protection. If both are present they get better close in mothering.
See seating or standing in cafes, buses, parks, even sleeping arangements for this inner and outer defence line around infants.
Fathers tend to scan environment for situational awareness which is harder if you need to extend your body with infants who can't avoid physical danger themselves (like falling through cracks, or staying away from dogs). If mother is extending her physical body to infants, protecting them from immediate environment, then she frees father up to perform that outer defensive line against further environmental threats.
Great work, Tom. And so, even with the caveat that there are no absolute or bright lines between the benefit of mothers and fathers to babies and toddlers on the one hand and tweens and teens on the other, we can ask ourselves which age group is having more struggles right now. And if it is evident that the answer is tweens and teens, we will do well to consider social realignments that give fathers primary responsibility for raising children for at least the foreseeable future.
Excellent title! Brilliant breakdown. Exactly why statically in head to head cases children and kids raised by single father’s vs single mother’s are more prone to be and better suited for the world in their adult years.
Good read. I just sat down with a couple yesterday and this was their problem. Mom couldn’t handle the idea of the risk and “danger” that dad was ok with. I damn near quoted articles like this to help them navigate.
The point is well taken here...and raises a question that will infuriate feminists. If a united team of mother and father is not available...could it be that it is the MOTHER who is less necessary for all but the very youngest children and should our family court system actually be directing children to live with their FATHERS so they learn to be adults rather than coddling and infantilizing mothers?
Fairy tails have women spiking their finger, finding their prince, working their way out of a well, finding their voice, restoring their hands or legs.
These all symbolise integrating the masculine.
Masculine faculties include discerning categories, planning, discipline, routine, universal morality, precise language, truthful language, boundary settings, mastering the environment and changing it.
Girls must integrate the masculine to prepare for motherhood. The female life stages being maiden under fathers protection. Motherhood under husbands protection. And matriarch where her need for protection has expired due to her ovarian reserve being gone.
The need for protection due to being able to raise children, but not alone, allows women to avoid moral development.
If a girl must make a resource allocation decision between a) difficult moral character development, and b) beautification and care skills. She gains nothing by prioritising the former. Her eggs deplete daily either way.
But by making herself attractive and a capable carer, she can better secure a husband who will protect her, and fertilise her eggs. Supplying her with protection and provisions she needs to gestate and raise infants with capable care.
Men on the other hand must compete in the physical world and have no choice but to invest in personal reinvention to climb the moral development scale.
How else would men be able to negotiate mating rights and a dowry for to be accepted to promote a maiden to matrimonium (the office of motherhood)?
Assuming all the responsibility for her protection and provision while also offering paternal inputs to the children.
It's hard to play two roles at once.
I can mother, or father, but not bothered at once.
Consider how a father blocks the exit by default, but if he's not around the mother picks up that role. Either way, kids get physical barrier protection. If both are present they get better close in mothering.
See seating or standing in cafes, buses, parks, even sleeping arangements for this inner and outer defence line around infants.
Fathers tend to scan environment for situational awareness which is harder if you need to extend your body with infants who can't avoid physical danger themselves (like falling through cracks, or staying away from dogs). If mother is extending her physical body to infants, protecting them from immediate environment, then she frees father up to perform that outer defensive line against further environmental threats.
Great work, Tom. And so, even with the caveat that there are no absolute or bright lines between the benefit of mothers and fathers to babies and toddlers on the one hand and tweens and teens on the other, we can ask ourselves which age group is having more struggles right now. And if it is evident that the answer is tweens and teens, we will do well to consider social realignments that give fathers primary responsibility for raising children for at least the foreseeable future.
Excellent title! Brilliant breakdown. Exactly why statically in head to head cases children and kids raised by single father’s vs single mother’s are more prone to be and better suited for the world in their adult years.
Good read. I just sat down with a couple yesterday and this was their problem. Mom couldn’t handle the idea of the risk and “danger” that dad was ok with. I damn near quoted articles like this to help them navigate.