Has the advent of the working women destroyed the family?

But during the first ten years the mother must be with the children at least 90% of the time. Effectively her ambitions are irrelevant during that time. Also its a good way of avoiding mothers embarking on extra-marital affairs.

Precisely, our standard of living certainly hasn't doubled - or come anywhere near.

It's a sad state of affairs.

You're assuming that staying at home only a women's role.

How sexist! So just because some one is a woman she's meant to devote all her life to her children while the big strong brave man goes out to work, earn money and bring home food!!!

Children are a mother's and father's responsability, it is not the "woman's place" to spend all her time with her children will the man is out doing what he wants. No woman's ambitions should be irrelevant just because she has children, in fact they should have a more prominant place - to provide for her children not just financially but by being a good role model, instead of a doormat.

As for your idea that staying at home means that women avoid extra-marital affairs.... it's so ridiculous and naive to think that just because a woman stays at home she wouldnt have an affair. It is sexist as well, maybe men should stay at home more... to stop them from straying?

Its a nice idea the sharing thing, but unfortunately not a realistic option what with men mostly being competitive and opportunistic and women mostly nurturing.

Its not so much that i think women ar inferior but that they have a special role which they neglect at society's peril.

Why don't you ask these stay at home dads if women are more nurturing?

http://homedad.org.uk/forum/index.php?sid=cd6882b88a3d402ddd7df1749fa4dae3

Exceptions exist. But as I've said, more men want to go out and 'win the bread' than women. More women want to stay at home than men and raise the kids full time.

More women are in caring positions like nurses, helping the elderly and disabled than men even. This is due to the stronger presence of certain hormones in females than males. Females generally are more 'nurturing' than males, whereas men are generally more career and goal driven than women.

Exceptions exist. But as I've said, more men want to go out and 'win the bread' than women. More women want to stay at home than men and raise the kids full time.

More women are in caring positions like nurses, helping the elderly and disabled than men even. This is due to the stronger presence of certain hormones in females than males. Females generally are more 'nurturing' than males, whereas men are generally more career and goal driven than women.

And 200 years ago we knew that black people didn't have souls and were suited to manual labour because they were more animal. Today some still believe black people naturally less intelligent and more suited to sport by their biology. It's interesting how these stereotypes take so long to go away.

Perhaps if we didn't believe in these stereotypes people wouldn't grow up to feel less nurturing or more nurturing or more goal driven and feel like it is natural for them because of their gender. Men are nurturing and not necessarily more goal driven, but I'm not going to bother using the example again because I've used it three times on this forum already. But if you really care to know what it is pm me.

And 200 years ago we knew that black people didn't have souls and were suited to manual labour because they were more animal. Today some still believe black people naturally less intelligent and more suited to sport by their biology. It's interesting how these stereotypes take so long to go away.

Perhaps if we didn't believe in these stereotypes people wouldn't grow up to feel less nurturing or more nurturing or more goal driven and feel like it is natural for them because of their gender. Men are nurturing and not necessarily more goal driven, but I'm not going to bother using the example again because I've used it three times on this forum already. But if you really care to know what it is pm me.

I don't enjoy saying it but slaves were bred to be unintelligent and physically strong. It would follow that the black people who are from slave descent are less intelligent... It really is quite unpleasant to say it but there is no point denying something that is at least possible.

I actually think we should nip this one in the bud, find out once and for all if it is true, and if so use some form of genetic screening technology to correct our wrongs and make them more intelligent. Of course no politician will ever bring it up, so lets go back to pretending tis not an issue.

And black people are more suited to sport than most other races. Is it bad to say that? They're also more immune to certain diseases.

And right now we know that females produce higher levels of some hormones compared to men, and vice versa. This is scientific fact and explains why certain jobs are dominated by certain genders (social care and nursing by women, physical jobs like the army and fire brigade by men).

You're really making quite an arse of yourself here by denying differences in the male and female brain.

And right now we know that females produce higher levels of some hormones compared to men, and vice versa. This is scientific fact and explains why certain jobs are dominated by certain genders (social care and nursing by women, physical jobs like the army and fire brigade by men).

You're really making quite an arse of yourself here by denying differences in the male and female brain.

And men evolved to be nurturing and women can tell who these men are and these men are those which enter into long term relationships. The whole basis of women choosing these men is that they will be nurturing. That is based on science. Good day to you.

And right now we know that females produce higher levels of some hormones compared to men, and vice versa. This is scientific fact and explains why certain jobs are dominated by certain genders (social care and nursing by women, physical jobs like the army and fire brigade by men).

You're really making quite an arse of yourself here by denying differences in the male and female brain.

lol

Do you really have any clue what you're saying?

Men and women being members of the same species all share the same traits and hormones. However, females produce more of certain hormones than males, meaning certain traits stronger in females than males, and vice versa. Men produce on average 17 times more testosterone than women. Women still produce it, but not nearly as much as men. Ergo, men are more aggressive and physically stronger because of having so much more testosterone. Read up on testosterone, oestrogen and oxytocin.

To say that men have evolved to become nurturing is untrue on so many levels. Firstly, they were never not nurturing, just not as much as females. Secondly, what exactly has changed in men to make them more nurturing - do they produce more oxytocin now than they used to, for example?

And lastly, prove that men who are nurturing are chosen for long term relationships. Hell, you only have to venture in the Health&Relationship section to see a horde of "Nice guys really do finish last' type threads to see this is untrue.



So male and female brains aren't different to some degree? I had best not argue with an idiot, because form a distance it is hard to tell who is who.