both parents working-blame feminism or consumerism?

Do you have a link or a few to back that up since that is news to me.

Some studies show this, and some studies show the opposite.Actually English languaged studies tend to show more negative effects of daycare and studies in the Nordic countries tend to show daycare having more positive effects.A Danish study shows that women who enjoy their job, it being full time parenting or a salaried position outside the home, tend to have better relationships with their children, and this reflects positively on them.I women do not enjoy their job, then their children experience more stress and more psychosomatic effects.Not all parents are well qualified to be full time caregivers. If they can offer their children high quality daycare with educated staff, appropriate group sizes and enough staff, this can have a positive effect. If the daycare has good continuity, that is high staff retention and appropriate measures when staff is hired or leave, this reduces the possible ill effects.Its a complex issue, quality care is essential when dealing with children ,but there is no set formula for this.

Science daily news article which gives a reference to the paper, I don't know of any free access sites you can read it on though.

But why aren't there more men who pride themselves on households and their families etc? Why don't more families make the choice that the husband stay home and the wife works?How many "stay-at-home" moms are not really a choice, but the result of the fact that the abysmal child-care system in this country forces many families that would prefer two incomes to have one parent stay at home, and that gender inequality in the workplace (in regards to salary, promotion, work expectations, and so forth) makes the it "natural" for the wife to "choose" to stay at home?

---

I've done everything the Bible says, even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff! -- Ned Flanders

you missed that thread where everyone was razzing me. you don't pay attention much, do you?

I think I generally agree with you although I have a couple of problems.Some of our "luxuries" are things like organic and healthy foods. The chips and soda diet is actually REALLY good for the wallet.The other reason why both my wife and I work is because her profession requires her to maintain a license to practice. It is a pain to leave and come back rather than just maintain it. There is also a lot of incentive to keep working because her field changes on almost a constant basis. And she likes it.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

Ok fair enough, but I don't think it was fair of you to single that out, as you already know I do it.FLying model planes CAN be an expensive hobby, but so can any hobby be if you do not go about it the right way.My first plane cost $169 complete with radio and battery. I put over 400 flights on it. The translates into $0.42 a flight. Plus I still have the plane, and could probably get an easy $50 for it, if I sold it.Compare that to bowling, and I think you can see that it is not expensive.All told, I've spent about $4000 over the last 8 years flying, less than a mediocre ATV, or waverunner. I've only lost one airframe, and kept all the guts, plus one crash. So I lost $340. Everything else I have, and could probably get $2000, or more, for it all. I put hundreds of flights every year, and it translates into pennies, to $1 a flight.What other hobby can you do, that you would call "expensive" and spend $1 for 15 minutes of fun.Even other guys at the field who have planes that go into the $6,000 a piece range, put an average of 200-400 flights on them before losing them. That is $15-30 per flight, and would be able to sell their planes for $3-4000 a plane. Most of the time, even if they crash them, they get back most of the components and would not lose the entire $6000, but could lose, $1500 on a single crash. Many times the airframes are rebuildable for a few hundred dollars of wood. Still comparable to most standard hobbies, and not considered expensive, once you do the math. And that is the extreme end of the scale.For instance, this crash of mine now world famous:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nMEB57mBB8
Cost me only $200 in parts to fix. Funny how we don't see the things we don't want to see.

No, I am not ignoring that. To each his own. Thanks to feminism, women do not have to stay at home. I agree.

It does for me, and why I agree with Mr.Jack. That is why I made the comparison, back in Message 21 the one you are replying too, a responsible adult.Why would you reply with that BS. More missed facts again? You can't say that for sure. It's not that I don't understand your situation, as you feel it was so bad, that you now do not want to have kids of your own. So it must have been for you, in your eyes.Sometimes even "bad" at home care, can be better than "bad daycare". You've seemed to turn out ok, but you carry the weight of your experiences with you.*on a personal off-topic note*
I believe Jesus's teachings on forgiveness can provide an avenue of release from all that. By not forgiveing people, you actually create a prison around yourself, and prevents you from being free (in a spiritual sense).
I only say that, because I care, and I have prayed for that situation of yours. I know it brings you pain.
Anthony

I can't answer that. IMO daycare could never replace what a loving caring responsible parent can provide.Small amounts of social interaction is good for your children, but too much, IMO, is not.

Why do men have penises and women vaginas?You make it sound like men do not participate in taking care of the household. Most of my male friends who have families, are actively involved in maintaining the home. You have to now! I have no clue, that's why I asked the question originally.
I don't know of any personally.

quote:

---

I believe Jesus's teachings on forgiveness can provide an avenue of release from all that. By not forgiveing people, you actually create a prison around yourself, and prevents you from being free (in a spiritual sense).

---

I certainly understand that you believe this and I appreciate the gesture in the way that you mean it.The thing is, where do you get the idea that I haven't forgiven my parents?Forgiving them doesn't mean that I suddenly forget what lousy parents they were, or that the damage they did is somehow undone. It doesn't mean that I like them, it doesn't mean I want to spend a lot of time with them, or that I am particularly interested in investing a lot in trying to have some kind of meaningful relationship with them. I know very well that they are simply not capable, and most likely, not interested either.I have forgiven them, to be sure, but that doesn't change the facts of the past and it doesn't mean that they have suddenly become kind, lovely, wonderful, emotionally-healthy people. They haven't, believe me.

quote:

---

I would have LOVED being in daycare compared to being at home. So would all of my siblings, I'm sure.

---

quote:

---

You can't say that for sure.

---

No, but I can be pretty damn confident that I'm right.

quote:

---

It's not that I don't understand your situation, as you feel it was so bad, that you now do not want to have kids of your own. So it must have been for you, in your eyes.

---

Look, my siblings and I all agree that my mother should never have had children. We were never starved, we were never sexually abused, we were never beaten so bad that we had to go to the hospital, we were given lots of material things, did various kinds of lessons and activities, and they sent all four of us to college and paid for all of the girls' weddings. There are many, many, many children who had and have it far, far worse than me.Nevertheless, my siblings and I had a really tension- and stress-filled upbringing and very little affection or love and lots of derision and sarcasm and anger and criticism from our parents, and that kind of thing makes a mark.

quote:

---

Sometimes even "bad" at home care, can be better than "bad daycare". You've seemed to turn out ok, but you carry the weight of your experiences with you.

---

Believe me, a big reason I turned out "OK" is in spite of my upbringing, not because of it. As a young adult and teenager I was heading the way of my mother in personality and attitude and could have easily become just like her if I hadn't decided to do the years of work it took to become emotionally healthy.Mediocre daycare would have been better than being at home with my mother. Miles better.

quote:

---

You make it sound like men do not participate in taking care of the household. Most of my male friends who have families, are actively involved in maintaining the home. You have to now!

---

Why do men "have to now"?My father never changed a single diaper, very rarely drove a single one of us kids to any lesson or practice, didn't do any of the cooking, cleaning, didn't take any of us to the doctor or dentist, didn't do any shopping for the household whatsoever. He never made a single appointment with a plumber, electrician, cable installer, etc. My mother was left to do all of this stuff because my father believed that it wasn't his job, and that he couldn't be bothered with such trivial, annoying tasks.My mother still did all of this stuff when she worked full time at our family business once us kids were older (I was still in grade school when they bought it).So, essentially, she had two full-time jobs and my father only had one. At the time, nobody in society thought that this was strange or unfair. Indeed, men still do far less than half of all housework, even when both parents work full time. Female children also do more housework than male children, even when the girls have just as much schoolwork as the boys.

Only to someone with a reading difficulty.I've never said anything about anyone participating in the care of the household. The topic I was discussing, which I thought was the topic of the thread, is two-income vs. one-income families, in particular, whether families are being forced into having more than one income earner.My guess is no. There may be some families that would rather not have two wage earners, but are forced to for economic reasons, but most families with two wage earners have chosen to structure their families in that way.Further, my guess is just the opposite. Although I imagine that some women have chosen of their own free will to devote their full time to care for children and household, I'm guessing that most would rather participate in the work force.

---

I've done everything the Bible says, even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff! -- Ned Flanders

Well, it's just that I remember you mentioning that you don't want to have kids, and you seemed to base that on the poor experiences you had.I understand the rest about not wanting to be close to them. I have the same situation with my mother.Oh, and thanks for being honest, I'm sure it was tough. We all have a story to tell about our childhood. I am determined to not let that happen with my children, regardless of our income. Money doesn't make you rich after all.