 |
|
Image via Wikipedia
From the Dr. Laura website about section:
As one of the most popular talk show hosts in radio history, Dr. Laura Schlessinger offers no-nonsense advice infused with a strong sense of ethics, accountability, and personal responsibility; she's been doing it successfully for more than 30 years, reaching approximately 9 million listeners weekly. Her internationally syndicated radio program is also heard on Sirius/XM Radio, and is streamed on the Internet and podcast via StreamLink.
I will have to admit that I am not a listener. I don't search through the AM stations looking for the Schlessinger Show. What I can report though are the facts. In a recent YouTube video, Dr. Laura took on stay-at-home-dads. As many of you that read dad blogs know--I am a stay-at-home dad. So, naturally, I wanted to hear what she had to say on the topic. Here's some of the highlights:
This is one that gets very sensitive....in general, when moms are working and dads are home...the moms, the women, the wives tend to change their feelings somewhat about their husbands. They tend not to see them as the heroes. The warrior. The man. The caretaker. The provider. The protector. And those feelings are really very significant. And I have found over the years that there often is more marital strife when the roles are reserved. Whether you're a feminist or not, whether you like it or not, them's just the facts.
Where to begin? Perhaps the most troubling thing about Dr. Laura's line of thinking is that while it obviously takes aim at stay-at-home dads, it also points to the fact that women rely on men. Now, I am not some kind of militant feminist, but I can see where Dr. Laura clearly has undercut her own gender. I have lived the life of a stay-at-home dad for nine years plus raising three daughters who are now 9, 7 & 4, and I can safely say that my wife and I have a very strong relationship. She hasn't once claimed that I was less of a provider/protector because I was changing diapers instead of hanging sheet-rock. In fact, our relationship has been strengthened by the fact that my wife has succeeded in her career, that our three daughters see their mother succeeding, that our daughters see a man rolling up his sleeves and doing housework, that our family has the best of both worlds--a dad very active in his children's lives and a mom very ready to parent the second she gets through the door. At first (the first year), I battled my own demons of self worth when my wife and I decided I was the one to stay-at-home, but stay-at-home moms go through the same thing. We all look to contribute.
I found my esteem through my children--as I should. Our daughters are kind, loving, respectful, wonderful kids and that is my greatest source of pride. My wife marvels at our daughters and she doesn't resent the fact that I stay home. To defend stay-at-home dads everywhere, Dr. Laura--you are wrong. Stay-at-home dads are good for their families. These dads are willing to swallow their pride for the greater good of their families. What could be more manly than that? Stay-at-home dads are warriors--poop warriors. SAHDs are heroes--just ask our kids and spouses. Role reversal doesn't breed contempt Doc. Dr. Laura must have been asleep for the last two and half decades.
Dr. Laura seems old fashioned. Old fashioned in her way of thinking. Old fashioned in her definition of family. Old fashioned in her psychology. What's funny is that she has a Harley Davidson mug clearly visible in her video--perhaps as a way to show folks that she is edgy or hip. Clearly she is neither and couldn't be further removed from the changes taking place in mainstream society around the country. Feel free to disagree with me, but first check out the video:
Related article -- Check out what they are saying at Feministing.com about Dr. Laura
Share this post!
Hits: 935
What people have to say (48)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by BellaDaddy, February 25, 2010
Personally, I believe, another pathetic attempt at grabbing attention...unless you experiecne what we do, as SAHD's...you could not possibly relate. Period...and I get so tired of the relentless a**lysis by so called professionals...I am proud of my family, proud of my life as a SAHD and I have the most amazing daughter because of it!!
-
- +0
-
-
written by SurprisedMom, February 25, 2010
I watched the video and she indeed say what you said she did, Joe. That in itself is derogatory and discriminatory, but then she went on to say it's how the parents treat each other that determines if the situation is good for the children. That is true in any situation, no matter which parent works outside the home and which works inside the home. Both parents have to respect and love each other and show that to their children. Children have to realize that each parent is contributing to the household and each works hard for them.
It's also up to the parent who stays at home to work out their own inner demons about not earning a paycheck. I lived that conflict, too. Sometimes when society treats the SAHP like a non-entity, you begin to doubt your own self worth. Then you look at your children, and realize what an amazing contribution you are making to your family.
SAHDs are not a new phenomenon, but are becoming more mainstream, so many are just now realizing how many SAHDs there are. SAHDs are recieving the same treatment SAHMs have borne for a long time. It's not right and it's not fair, but it's not surprising.
I don't think the doctor condemened SAHDs as a whole. She did admit when it worked, it worked well. In the end, though, it's not what the "experts" have to say, it's how the husband and wife want their family to work. It's not up to anyone outside the family to say what's right and wrong for the family. That is why I shut out "experts" a long time ago.
@BellaDaddy: Rock On!
It's also up to the parent who stays at home to work out their own inner demons about not earning a paycheck. I lived that conflict, too. Sometimes when society treats the SAHP like a non-entity, you begin to doubt your own self worth. Then you look at your children, and realize what an amazing contribution you are making to your family.
SAHDs are not a new phenomenon, but are becoming more mainstream, so many are just now realizing how many SAHDs there are. SAHDs are recieving the same treatment SAHMs have borne for a long time. It's not right and it's not fair, but it's not surprising.
I don't think the doctor condemened SAHDs as a whole. She did admit when it worked, it worked well. In the end, though, it's not what the "experts" have to say, it's how the husband and wife want their family to work. It's not up to anyone outside the family to say what's right and wrong for the family. That is why I shut out "experts" a long time ago.
@BellaDaddy: Rock On!
-
- +0
-
-
written by Joeprah, February 25, 2010
@ SM - True that, but just like she wanted to be controversial with her approach to the topic, I think a response should be similarly controversial to shed light on the fact of just how stupid her statement was. You can't have one without the other.
Imagine if she had made a blanket racial statement? What would be the backlash? Could she say something on one hand and then back up and say well, it really all depends if this were about another demographic in society--I think not. SAHDs are an easy target to a lot of zealots, but not anymore--zealots are on notice.
Imagine if she had made a blanket racial statement? What would be the backlash? Could she say something on one hand and then back up and say well, it really all depends if this were about another demographic in society--I think not. SAHDs are an easy target to a lot of zealots, but not anymore--zealots are on notice.
-
- +0
-
-
written by SurprisedMom, February 25, 2010
Joe, I agree with what you're saying. She couldn't make a blanket racial statement and then back off. But she wasn't making a blanket statement about SAHDs, she was answering a question and gave her opinion. Personally, I don't care much for her opinion and don't listen to or read her "advice." I don't think she was being controversial for controversy's sake. I think you have to be careful when you do that. No, SAHDs shouldn't be an easy target and I think SAHDs will make that perfectly clear. I just wish SAHMs would have fought the battle just as hard.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Joeprah, February 25, 2010
SAH--anything deserves respect. Period. Folks like Dr. Laura just make me angry.
-
- +0
-
-
written by prin, February 25, 2010
She had a show on the radio here and promptly got the boot by the overwhelming majority of the population for her overly old-fashioned "psychology".
Honestly, no job would compare in making my [future] guy a hero to me like cleaning up kids' puke. Seriously. To say that all we need is our man to work outside the home for him to be a hero in our eyes is bull. We each have our limitations, and frankly, doing what a stay at home dad does is probably all of mine.
(Maybe I shouldn't have kids. )
Honestly, no job would compare in making my [future] guy a hero to me like cleaning up kids' puke. Seriously. To say that all we need is our man to work outside the home for him to be a hero in our eyes is bull. We each have our limitations, and frankly, doing what a stay at home dad does is probably all of mine.
(Maybe I shouldn't have kids. )
-
- +0
-
-
written by , February 25, 2010
I was briefly acquainted with Dr. Laura professionally years ago, when she had nothing more than a local talk show on KFI in Los Angeles. At that time, she didn't seem as extreme on such issues as she is now. Perhaps it's the fact that she's gotten older (and man has she--I hardly recognize her). Perhaps it's that she's had her own share of marital dysfunction--reportedly with affairs in both of them and other strife with her current husband. And perhaps it's because of her increasingly conservative religious views. Or perhaps all of the above.
But I don't think this woman's opinion is pertinent in today's society, other than for the fact that she has so much influence over the minions who support her and live by her every word. She's old news, and so is her advice. But that people DO listen to her--primarily women--may explain some of the backlash against SAHDs recently.
I can't do much about that, so I suppose I'll have to ignore it and take stock in the fact that my wife and I are quite obviously in the correct roles--and that our children are glad for that. I wish every SAHD could say that with confidence, regardless of Dr. Laura's windbag opinion...
But I don't think this woman's opinion is pertinent in today's society, other than for the fact that she has so much influence over the minions who support her and live by her every word. She's old news, and so is her advice. But that people DO listen to her--primarily women--may explain some of the backlash against SAHDs recently.
I can't do much about that, so I suppose I'll have to ignore it and take stock in the fact that my wife and I are quite obviously in the correct roles--and that our children are glad for that. I wish every SAHD could say that with confidence, regardless of Dr. Laura's windbag opinion...
-
- +0
-
-
written by Joeprah, February 25, 2010
@ Prin -- That's great that her show got the boot. I can see why too. From a 2 minute clip I almost barfed.
@ Fantasy Champ -- Great comment. I had no idea she had been through so much personally, would explain her angst.
@ Fantasy Champ -- Great comment. I had no idea she had been through so much personally, would explain her angst.
-
- +0
-
-
written by , February 25, 2010
The one SAHD that I know didn't have much of his masculinity left when he gave up his career. As a SAHM who recently ended an affair with him, I can say that I gave to him a chance to use some of that with me, because he certainly didn't have any when it came to his wife. Unfortunately, he wasn't very much of a provider/protector to me, either, getting me pregnant and coercing an abortion, saving him from his fear. Thankfully, I'm better off without him, I now know, and he's still stuck in the same place.
-
- -1
-
-
written by Joeprah, February 25, 2010
Sounds like a relationship problem more than a SAHD one. Seriously, you are admitting you had an affair with a married man why?
-
- +0
-
-
written by Dad is in the House, February 25, 2010
Dr. Laura is practically an advocate of SAHDs compared to Joy Behar calling us bums.
-
- +0
-
-
written by pjmullen, February 25, 2010
She's right, being a SAHD has changed my wife's opinion of me...for the better.
What is right for my family, isn't necessarily right for yours, or hers. It would be ignorant for me to think I could convince you otherwise, just as she is ignorant for trying to tell me how family values as she sees them are right for mine. Clearly given her own problems keeping a marriage and a relationship together she should do more listening and less talking, but that clearly isn't going to happen.
Remember folks, when people listen to the advice of this hack the terrorists win.
What is right for my family, isn't necessarily right for yours, or hers. It would be ignorant for me to think I could convince you otherwise, just as she is ignorant for trying to tell me how family values as she sees them are right for mine. Clearly given her own problems keeping a marriage and a relationship together she should do more listening and less talking, but that clearly isn't going to happen.
Remember folks, when people listen to the advice of this hack the terrorists win.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Daddy Files, February 25, 2010
The real problem, Joeprah, is that you're listening to Dr. FREAKING Laura!! That's like attending a KKK rally and getting offended when they say something negative about blacks. This woman is a hack, her "advice" is garbage and anyone who listens to her and heeds her advice religiously is probably already a lost cause.
She's not worth the effort it took for you to create this post.
She's not worth the effort it took for you to create this post.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Chris Singer (tessasdad), February 25, 2010
Thanks for posting this Joe. I don't listen to Dr. Laura at all and don't generally listen to the right-wing conservative radio stations she is played on. From what I do know about her, she pretty consistently has to make outrageous and ridiculous claims as this to fit in with her conservative and religious listeners.
Like other SAHDs who have commented, I have found the opposite of which she claims - my wife's opinion of me has grown since I have become a SAHD.
I'm proud to be home with my daughter and could care less about anyone else's opinion is on the matter --- especially, a washed up radio "doctor."
Like other SAHDs who have commented, I have found the opposite of which she claims - my wife's opinion of me has grown since I have become a SAHD.
I'm proud to be home with my daughter and could care less about anyone else's opinion is on the matter --- especially, a washed up radio "doctor."
-
- +0
-
-
written by Reservoir Dad, February 25, 2010
Nice work Joe. In the early days of my SAHD career I would have felt overwhelming anger at this - a reflection of my own issues. But like you, I can now see how my stay-at-home-dadding great has been for my family, and my relationship with my wife has never been stronger. I can only laugh at stuff like this now but I might see if the northern dads want to get in on it with a Round Table Discussion for Dad-Blogs.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Spiny Norman, February 25, 2010
If it walks like a blithering idiot, talks like a blithering idiot, and sounds like a blithering idiot...well then...it's a blithering idiot.
I wonder what the outcome would be if Dr. Laura and Rush Limbaugh ever copulated and conceived a child...
I wonder what the outcome would be if Dr. Laura and Rush Limbaugh ever copulated and conceived a child...
-
- +0
-
-
written by SAHDPDX, February 25, 2010
Yeah I'm OK with this archaic view of what I do. Sometimes I think that our family is on a little secret that no one else knows about and while I know that isn't exactly true this type of response from "trusted voice" shows that less people know. My kids will be soothed by either of us, my wife has the husband she needs, and I have fulfillment in my stay at home work. I don't need a doctor to tell me what is right, my family tells me everyday.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Zerzix, February 25, 2010
I respect and family that has a stay-at-home-parent. Children need a parent at home, especially in thier impressionable years. A stay-at-home-parent is essential to instilling your families beliefs and values into your children. Kudos to the Stay-At_Home-Parent, weather it is the mother or father.
With that in mind, I do agree to a point with the basic principle of her statement. Men both men and women are losing their identities. Men, by nature, are hunters, provider, and protectors, and women are nurturers. This is part of the traditional family, and traditional Christian values.
I am not saying that a family can not turn out loving and well balanced with a stay-at-home-dad. I can even see situations where financially (based on the skill set and job selection) it would be more beneficial for the woman to work. Either way, I do feel that for a good family structure and values one parent should be there for the children any time they are needed.
With that in mind, I do agree to a point with the basic principle of her statement. Men both men and women are losing their identities. Men, by nature, are hunters, provider, and protectors, and women are nurturers. This is part of the traditional family, and traditional Christian values.
I am not saying that a family can not turn out loving and well balanced with a stay-at-home-dad. I can even see situations where financially (based on the skill set and job selection) it would be more beneficial for the woman to work. Either way, I do feel that for a good family structure and values one parent should be there for the children any time they are needed.
-
- -1
-
-
written by Joeprah, February 25, 2010
@ Zerzix -- What identities are we 'supposed' to have? What are Christian identities? I think you are making a point here that women and men are different, and that's fine, but do our differences make one of us better or more predisposed to being a caregiver? Does that have anything to do with Christianity?
-
- +0
-
-
written by Zerzix, February 25, 2010
The basic family structure in the bible (which is common over most of the world) places the Woman as the caregiver, and the man as the provider. Within many careers in most cities the skills and knowledge of both males and females can fill these positions. I do feel that most women are more predisposed to the caregive position, but I am not discounting the ability of men to be caregivers. I respect those men who do stay at home with their children, and if the situation of employment within our family was different I may have been a SAHD.
I am not in full agreement that a SAHD is a bad thing, in fact any stay-at-home-parent is better than none. One of the cartoons that I enjoy watching with my children has a SAHD in it. I am just in agreement that the gender identities are being lost in our society. Weather this is good or bad is up for debate, I personal an mon the side of "Men should Be Men".
I am not in full agreement that a SAHD is a bad thing, in fact any stay-at-home-parent is better than none. One of the cartoons that I enjoy watching with my children has a SAHD in it. I am just in agreement that the gender identities are being lost in our society. Weather this is good or bad is up for debate, I personal an mon the side of "Men should Be Men".
-
- -1
-
-
written by Seash**e, February 26, 2010
In one shot she has managed to put down SAHD's and almost all women! Wow.
My husband is a wonderful caretaker. He also has the luxury of being off every Friday, making him the go-to guy for appointments and many other care-giving tasks. There is no friction, I am grateful there is someone else to do these things so I can focus on my job without taking time off. I also happen to love what I do, so if we were able, he would be the one to stay home for sure! These things make him better in my eyes, not less!
My husband is a wonderful caretaker. He also has the luxury of being off every Friday, making him the go-to guy for appointments and many other care-giving tasks. There is no friction, I am grateful there is someone else to do these things so I can focus on my job without taking time off. I also happen to love what I do, so if we were able, he would be the one to stay home for sure! These things make him better in my eyes, not less!
-
- +1
-
-
written by Daddy Files, February 26, 2010
Zerzix: Wow. I need to break this one down one statement at a time. Here goes:
Children need a parent at home, especially in thier impressionable years.
Children don't "need" a parent at home full-time. In our house, my wife and I both need to work to make ends meet. We use daycare, which works out great because we found someone fantastic to look after our son during the day. And he's doing just fine.
A stay-at-home-parent is essential to instilling your families beliefs and values into your children.
A stay at home parent is great and I give them all the credit in the world. But it is not "essential" to have one parent at home in order to instill sound beliefs and values in your kids. Again, most American families are dual income, especially with the economy the way it is. There is no empirical evidence that I know of to suggest kids with stay at home parents fare any better than kids with parents who both work full time. To suggest otherwise is inaccurate and more than slightly insulting.
Men both men and women are losing their identities. Men, by nature, are hunters, provider, and protectors, and women are nurturers. This is part of the traditional family, and traditional Christian values.
I agree with you on this one. Men and women are shedding their traditional and archaic identities. However, I think you view this as a negative while I'm thrilled about it. Not everyone is Christian (thank goodness) and I, for one, am happy to see old stereotypes fall by the wayside as society progresses in this regard.
Either way, I do feel that for a good family structure and values one parent should be there for the children any time they are needed.
Well, thank you for unnecessarily putting down all the families who don't fit your particular and narrow version of a "good family structure."
I do feel that most women are more predisposed to the caregive position, but I am not discounting the ability of men to be caregivers.
This is total bull. It is a complete myth that women are somehow predisposed to nurturing and are more capable of caring for a child as a man. Both are equally up to the task. Long-held stereotypes have squeezed men out of the parenting circle for many years, but that's only because men allowed societal norms to dictate how they should act as a dad.
I am just in agreement that the gender identities are being lost in our society. Weather this is good or bad is up for debate, I personal an mon the side of "Men should Be Men".
I agree, gender identities are being lost. And that's a good thing. Because if you haven't noticed, this isn't the 1950s anymore. Men no longer have to withhold emotion from their kids and simply bring home a paycheck while his wife puts on a house dress and mixes a martini when he gets home from work. Dads are actually involved now. Sure we're still hunters and protectors, but we're more than that now. And that's a good thing. Men should be men, and for that reason they should do whatever is necessary for their family, even if that means bucking tradition and "Christian values."
Children need a parent at home, especially in thier impressionable years.
Children don't "need" a parent at home full-time. In our house, my wife and I both need to work to make ends meet. We use daycare, which works out great because we found someone fantastic to look after our son during the day. And he's doing just fine.
A stay-at-home-parent is essential to instilling your families beliefs and values into your children.
A stay at home parent is great and I give them all the credit in the world. But it is not "essential" to have one parent at home in order to instill sound beliefs and values in your kids. Again, most American families are dual income, especially with the economy the way it is. There is no empirical evidence that I know of to suggest kids with stay at home parents fare any better than kids with parents who both work full time. To suggest otherwise is inaccurate and more than slightly insulting.
Men both men and women are losing their identities. Men, by nature, are hunters, provider, and protectors, and women are nurturers. This is part of the traditional family, and traditional Christian values.
I agree with you on this one. Men and women are shedding their traditional and archaic identities. However, I think you view this as a negative while I'm thrilled about it. Not everyone is Christian (thank goodness) and I, for one, am happy to see old stereotypes fall by the wayside as society progresses in this regard.
Either way, I do feel that for a good family structure and values one parent should be there for the children any time they are needed.
Well, thank you for unnecessarily putting down all the families who don't fit your particular and narrow version of a "good family structure."
I do feel that most women are more predisposed to the caregive position, but I am not discounting the ability of men to be caregivers.
This is total bull. It is a complete myth that women are somehow predisposed to nurturing and are more capable of caring for a child as a man. Both are equally up to the task. Long-held stereotypes have squeezed men out of the parenting circle for many years, but that's only because men allowed societal norms to dictate how they should act as a dad.
I am just in agreement that the gender identities are being lost in our society. Weather this is good or bad is up for debate, I personal an mon the side of "Men should Be Men".
I agree, gender identities are being lost. And that's a good thing. Because if you haven't noticed, this isn't the 1950s anymore. Men no longer have to withhold emotion from their kids and simply bring home a paycheck while his wife puts on a house dress and mixes a martini when he gets home from work. Dads are actually involved now. Sure we're still hunters and protectors, but we're more than that now. And that's a good thing. Men should be men, and for that reason they should do whatever is necessary for their family, even if that means bucking tradition and "Christian values."
-
- +1
-
-
written by DaddyIsPerplexed, February 26, 2010
Oh Dr. Laura, the ways I despise your views are infinite. I hope you're happy up on that pedestal of yours, and I hope you at least derive great joy from causing so many misery.
To those couple folks who have discussed men losing their masculine identities, I say a hearty "Thank goodness and good riddance!!!" My wife and I derisively refer to those types of men (you know the type we have in mind) as "Dude-guys" and news of their eventual demise is most welcome. The day I stop seeing men who are incapable of lending a hand to their overstressed wives because that's "women's work" and the day no women believe that their only place is in a domestic capacity will be a glorious day indeed! Please let me know when it has arrived because when I look around I still see plenty of it all over the place.
A couple of you folks cite Biblical text as the guide for male/female roles, but even the most adamant young earth creationists allow for a good number of years prior to the authorship of that text. Prior to then, what was the guide for the gender structure you allege? The Old Testament does little to demonstrate that males are somehow less masculine if they opt to focus on domestic issues. Heck, the Old Testament and the Qur'an have one of the strongest, burliest single moms in all of literature: Hagar. Think about being a single mother in that era. She raised Ishmael single-handedly and he became a hugely significant leader. Are you telling us that Hagar didn't have to play the part of protector and subvert some alleged gender roles?
I'd also like to point out, Zerzix, that your charge that the Biblical construction of gender "...is common over most of the world..." is a little problematic. Assuming we group Christianity with other Abrahamic traditions (Islam, Judaism, etc.), we do arrive at a pretty massive group of folks at over 3.5 billion. But this still does nothing to account for the roughly 2 billion (more, really, but I'm being conservative in my estimate) people who turn to Indian traditions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. for their religious perspectives, and these two groups still don't account for another billion plus people in the world. I don't know if you were trying to make an appeal to majority here to demonstrate your case (a fallacious argument in its own right but understandable given the context), but I contend that you might want to reconsider that approach.
To those couple folks who have discussed men losing their masculine identities, I say a hearty "Thank goodness and good riddance!!!" My wife and I derisively refer to those types of men (you know the type we have in mind) as "Dude-guys" and news of their eventual demise is most welcome. The day I stop seeing men who are incapable of lending a hand to their overstressed wives because that's "women's work" and the day no women believe that their only place is in a domestic capacity will be a glorious day indeed! Please let me know when it has arrived because when I look around I still see plenty of it all over the place.
A couple of you folks cite Biblical text as the guide for male/female roles, but even the most adamant young earth creationists allow for a good number of years prior to the authorship of that text. Prior to then, what was the guide for the gender structure you allege? The Old Testament does little to demonstrate that males are somehow less masculine if they opt to focus on domestic issues. Heck, the Old Testament and the Qur'an have one of the strongest, burliest single moms in all of literature: Hagar. Think about being a single mother in that era. She raised Ishmael single-handedly and he became a hugely significant leader. Are you telling us that Hagar didn't have to play the part of protector and subvert some alleged gender roles?
I'd also like to point out, Zerzix, that your charge that the Biblical construction of gender "...is common over most of the world..." is a little problematic. Assuming we group Christianity with other Abrahamic traditions (Islam, Judaism, etc.), we do arrive at a pretty massive group of folks at over 3.5 billion. But this still does nothing to account for the roughly 2 billion (more, really, but I'm being conservative in my estimate) people who turn to Indian traditions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. for their religious perspectives, and these two groups still don't account for another billion plus people in the world. I don't know if you were trying to make an appeal to majority here to demonstrate your case (a fallacious argument in its own right but understandable given the context), but I contend that you might want to reconsider that approach.
-
- +1
-
-
written by BellaDaddy, February 26, 2010
UGH, another bible quoting, Christian values sermon. Seems virtually every pertinent debate of late, on Dad-Blogs, subverts to biblical values and religious debate...and proselytizing. Has anyone actually read the "evil" quotes and passages in the bible? Like God slaughtering entire villages, virgin women being raped, men, women and children being forsaken (murdered) all in the name of God? Hell, even unborn children being aborted, in Gods name! Where is the lesson in these?
I ran across a bumper sticker recently that said: "If more people actually read the bible, there would be more atheists!" My point being, that I am a little tired of convenient bible passage quoting for some sort of personal gain or insult. Just doesn't seem productive here.
Now, my religion is none of anyone's business, nor is yours mine. This is a venue for Dads...period! Not some personal belief support system for religion! It is your prerogative to believe or not, however you so choose, but, please, please, do not assume I am here to accept, absorb or read your renditions of the "book of God"...
And yes, I have, and DO read the bible. Unlike most, it seems!
I ran across a bumper sticker recently that said: "If more people actually read the bible, there would be more atheists!" My point being, that I am a little tired of convenient bible passage quoting for some sort of personal gain or insult. Just doesn't seem productive here.
Now, my religion is none of anyone's business, nor is yours mine. This is a venue for Dads...period! Not some personal belief support system for religion! It is your prerogative to believe or not, however you so choose, but, please, please, do not assume I am here to accept, absorb or read your renditions of the "book of God"...
And yes, I have, and DO read the bible. Unlike most, it seems!
-
- +1
-
-
written by thezsdad, February 26, 2010
To Zerzix and the others who turn to the Bible for ammo on every debate...
Has it ever occurred to you that in addition to the billions who do not prescribe to your religions, there are also many who are either agnostic or atheist? Your Biblical reasoning may seem like the end all, be all in logic to you, but to us, it's of zero value. So where does that leave you, since you're so intent on convincing us that you're right? If these are the best arguments you can come up with, you might want to go back to the drawing board and look for logic that will hold water to all, not just to those who share your beliefs.
I live in a VERY conservative, VERY Christian community where I've been questioned and even attacked for being a SAHD by folks intent on convincing me that I'm going against their God's order of things. That I don't buy their arguments means little to them, as it only serves to fire them up evangelically. I want to laugh, but I don't, out of the respect they fail to show me in return. But c'mon. I get so sick of this crap. And my reaction to them (at least inside, since I keep it to myself, not willing to argue with them) is the same as it is to you: Try something new, please. Because what you're preaching right now isn't working on those of us outside of your choir...
Has it ever occurred to you that in addition to the billions who do not prescribe to your religions, there are also many who are either agnostic or atheist? Your Biblical reasoning may seem like the end all, be all in logic to you, but to us, it's of zero value. So where does that leave you, since you're so intent on convincing us that you're right? If these are the best arguments you can come up with, you might want to go back to the drawing board and look for logic that will hold water to all, not just to those who share your beliefs.
I live in a VERY conservative, VERY Christian community where I've been questioned and even attacked for being a SAHD by folks intent on convincing me that I'm going against their God's order of things. That I don't buy their arguments means little to them, as it only serves to fire them up evangelically. I want to laugh, but I don't, out of the respect they fail to show me in return. But c'mon. I get so sick of this crap. And my reaction to them (at least inside, since I keep it to myself, not willing to argue with them) is the same as it is to you: Try something new, please. Because what you're preaching right now isn't working on those of us outside of your choir...
-
- +1
-
-
written by Joeprah, February 26, 2010
I just wanted to say that DaddyIsPerplexed is the kind of guy I want to back me up in an argument.
-
- +0
-
-
written by eyesofbabes, February 26, 2010
As a fellow atheist, Amen! You guys said it.
As a working father, I admire SAHDs. I wish I were one but my wife wanted to be at home with our girls. I regret not being there more and wish I were. I want to start my own home business so I can see them more and play a bigger role. Dr. Laura is full of it. Bravo all you SAHDs, you are real men!
As a working father, I admire SAHDs. I wish I were one but my wife wanted to be at home with our girls. I regret not being there more and wish I were. I want to start my own home business so I can see them more and play a bigger role. Dr. Laura is full of it. Bravo all you SAHDs, you are real men!
-
- +0
-
-
written by Jesse, February 26, 2010
I believe the traditional family is best but I wouldn't say the role reversed family is "bad". It's just different and can create problems because it's a fact that men have ego's and it's not a necessarily a bad thing either. It's the way God made men. The modern role reversed family whether we like it or not emasculates the father. And we shouldn't be trying to emasculate fathers because it's not healthy. Also, woman deep down inside want a prince charming. It's also the way God made woman. People often use scripture on this matter, but often out of context. Scripture doesn't condemn SAHD's at all. It's just not the ideal family makeup. Don't feel bad or anything, it's just not.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Reservoir Dad, February 26, 2010
Ha. Jesse and co are real crack-ups. Luckily for my family the bible, which is a really boring, piece of work, has about as much relevance as cranky old Laura.
P.S I am my wife's prince charming, knight in shining armour, whatever you want to call it.
P.S.S Zerzix - Provider and caregiver? As a Stay at home dad I am 'providing' for my family, and as a working mum my wife is still 'caring' for her family. People aren't cardboard cut-outs.
P.S I am my wife's prince charming, knight in shining armour, whatever you want to call it.
P.S.S Zerzix - Provider and caregiver? As a Stay at home dad I am 'providing' for my family, and as a working mum my wife is still 'caring' for her family. People aren't cardboard cut-outs.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Daddy Files, February 26, 2010
Hear that Joeprah? Don't feel bad that you're not ideal, you're just an emasculated nancy boy SAHD.
And Jesse is totally right. All women really want is a man to come in and take care of them. In fact I showed my wife what you wrote Jesse. She wanted to respond to you personally but she's too busy tracking you down so she can come after you with a wrench.
I hate to break it to you sparky, but men AND women have egos. Men aren't emasculated just because they stay at home taking care of their family, and women aren't helpless princesses in need of rescue. What you can ideal, I call sickening. I can't imagine being married to someone that co-dependent.
And the only ideal family make up is having parents who love the crap out of their kids. Could be two dads, two moms, etc. As long as they're good parents it DOES. NOT. MATTER.
And Jesse is totally right. All women really want is a man to come in and take care of them. In fact I showed my wife what you wrote Jesse. She wanted to respond to you personally but she's too busy tracking you down so she can come after you with a wrench.
I hate to break it to you sparky, but men AND women have egos. Men aren't emasculated just because they stay at home taking care of their family, and women aren't helpless princesses in need of rescue. What you can ideal, I call sickening. I can't imagine being married to someone that co-dependent.
And the only ideal family make up is having parents who love the crap out of their kids. Could be two dads, two moms, etc. As long as they're good parents it DOES. NOT. MATTER.
-
- +0
-
-
written by thezsdad, February 26, 2010
@eyesofbabes, thanks for the kind words, but those of us fortunate enough to be SAHDs are just doing, I believe, what many if not all men would do if given the chance. When I quit my job 8-1/2 years ago, the initial reaction from my male coworkers was stereotypical macho wise-cracking. But on the day I left, many of them were approaching me and telling me how jealous they were, so I know the truth.
@Jesse, be careful how you stereotype. I have about as little male ego as you can imagine (and no, I'm not some wimp, I just don't do macho). I don't buy your emasculation argument, because not all of us are cookie cuttered the way you're suggesting. I never fit into the job market--never felt the drive or played the game the way my male friends and coworkers did--just as my wife never felt comfortable in a domestic setting.
That's why, when we decided we wanted someone home with our kids, there was NO question about who it would be. She'd been excitedly scaling mountains in her career, while, even though I too had success, every day for me was agony. Meanwhile, she'd never pretended to be cut out for full-time domesticity, as those duties had been by and large handled by me even before we had kids. May not be your ideal, but it certainly was ours. We both adapted quickly to what were our obvious and natural roles, and we've never looked back after all these years.
And as for the involvement of "God"...well, I won't belabor that point, other than to suggest reading my post a few above this one and understand why that argument doesn't hold water with me--or with others like me. I can only imagine what your reaction would have been if--gasp--we'd been two men (or two women) trying to sort out who was better suited to stay home...
@Jesse, be careful how you stereotype. I have about as little male ego as you can imagine (and no, I'm not some wimp, I just don't do macho). I don't buy your emasculation argument, because not all of us are cookie cuttered the way you're suggesting. I never fit into the job market--never felt the drive or played the game the way my male friends and coworkers did--just as my wife never felt comfortable in a domestic setting.
That's why, when we decided we wanted someone home with our kids, there was NO question about who it would be. She'd been excitedly scaling mountains in her career, while, even though I too had success, every day for me was agony. Meanwhile, she'd never pretended to be cut out for full-time domesticity, as those duties had been by and large handled by me even before we had kids. May not be your ideal, but it certainly was ours. We both adapted quickly to what were our obvious and natural roles, and we've never looked back after all these years.
And as for the involvement of "God"...well, I won't belabor that point, other than to suggest reading my post a few above this one and understand why that argument doesn't hold water with me--or with others like me. I can only imagine what your reaction would have been if--gasp--we'd been two men (or two women) trying to sort out who was better suited to stay home...
-
- +0
-
-
written by Zerzix, February 26, 2010
Once again, people are miss-reading my comments. I am not saying that being a SAHD is a bad thing, I am saying that it is better for a family for either parent to stay at home with the children. In fact I said that if things were different within my family, I may have been a SAHD. All my point was that Dr. Laura’s statement has merit, there is truth in the fact that the role as primary provider is being lost by men. Weather you think this is important in today's society is your opinion, and you are entitled to it, as I am entitled to mine.
Apparently everyone's opinion is welcome here, as long as it is the same as everyone else's. The past few comments I have taken part in I have been flamed and bashed for presenting my opinion, even though I do it respectfully until a lack of respect is shown to me. Since it feels as if my input and point of view is not welcome here, I may as well stop my partic**ation on this site. I am sorry for taking up your time with my traditional “Bible Thumping” point of view.
Apparently everyone's opinion is welcome here, as long as it is the same as everyone else's. The past few comments I have taken part in I have been flamed and bashed for presenting my opinion, even though I do it respectfully until a lack of respect is shown to me. Since it feels as if my input and point of view is not welcome here, I may as well stop my partic**ation on this site. I am sorry for taking up your time with my traditional “Bible Thumping” point of view.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Zerzix, February 26, 2010
@Jesse: I do not feel that is it an issue of ego or what women want. That my be an issue with in your life, but if my family was better of with me as a SAHD my ego would not suffer. God did not give men egos, they formed those on their own and the bible warns of the folly of pride. Being a SAHD is not a sin but pride is.
I personally prefer traditional values and biblical value sets. being a SAHD is not a sin or condemned in any way. the bible does place the Man in the role of working to provide thing such as food for the family. If your wife can better provide for your family than you, don’t get your feelings hurt. My wife is highly intelligent, and is continuing her collage education even as a homemaker. If there ever comes a point where we are better off with her as the primary provider, we may change places.
I personally prefer traditional values and biblical value sets. being a SAHD is not a sin or condemned in any way. the bible does place the Man in the role of working to provide thing such as food for the family. If your wife can better provide for your family than you, don’t get your feelings hurt. My wife is highly intelligent, and is continuing her collage education even as a homemaker. If there ever comes a point where we are better off with her as the primary provider, we may change places.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Philip M. Hofer (Frumph), February 27, 2010
I'm a stay at home dad. Just gotta say, "Dr. Laura" probably was abused as a child and is a man hater. Roles are based on society viewpoints, Dr. Laura's viewpoint is based on military values which are often times quite contrary to the beliefs of the society as a whole. That and it's her own opinion. That being said, it means nothing and I will still be a single dad raising a wonderful son that will be stronger and more capable in the world with the love and trust that I have given him.
Dr. Laura is nothing.
Dr. Laura is nothing.
-
- +0
-
-
written by BikiniMom, February 27, 2010
I posted my feelings about this topic on the dad-blog fan page on FB so I will keep this brief. (Believe it or not I can do that too LOL) As a former SAHM I can say that I FOUGHT the good fight and did it successfully. My sister did the same. I had four kids and she had three. We managed to take care of our families and provide whatever our kids needed. We weren't always able (nor did we necessarily WANT) to give our children whatever they wanted but they ALWAYS had what they needed, even when they didn't ask for it.
Bottom line is this. This woman is a cancer. She isn't just *some lady* who is voicing her opinion. She has a responsibility to THINK before she opens her mouth as SHE KNOWS that her words influence many. That doesn't mean that she shouldn't be true to herself. I do know who she is (familiar with the name) but I've never heard any of her advice before. THIS ONE ARTICLE WAS MORE THAN ENOUGH FOR ME.
For anyone, especially SAHM mom's to diminish the fact that our male counterparts have it worse than we did is IMHO silly. These guys have it WAY WORSE so they deserve all the support that we can muster.
I always used to say that "motherhood is like a toilet. Everybody craps on you because THEY KNOW you aren't going anywhere." Since I've come to personally know THREE SAHD's I've changed the word motherhood to stay-at-home parenthood. The guys have it harder because they are downed by EVERYONE questioning their manhood... I mean, hello - they are men! How offensive can it be to take stabs at the core of your being - in addition to the crap that is heaped on the moms for being lazy, lacking ambition, etc, etc...
I don't care if this woman spoke sanity and delivered positive messages for the bulk of her career BEFORE THIS. From this point on, the broad needs a B^tch slap because what she said will negatively affect countless families who are doing what so many more (too many) families have CHOSEN NOT TO DO... and that is to put their family first.
Screw Dr Laura... I would GLADLY go toe to toe with that irresponsible shrew.
Bottom line is this. This woman is a cancer. She isn't just *some lady* who is voicing her opinion. She has a responsibility to THINK before she opens her mouth as SHE KNOWS that her words influence many. That doesn't mean that she shouldn't be true to herself. I do know who she is (familiar with the name) but I've never heard any of her advice before. THIS ONE ARTICLE WAS MORE THAN ENOUGH FOR ME.
For anyone, especially SAHM mom's to diminish the fact that our male counterparts have it worse than we did is IMHO silly. These guys have it WAY WORSE so they deserve all the support that we can muster.
I always used to say that "motherhood is like a toilet. Everybody craps on you because THEY KNOW you aren't going anywhere." Since I've come to personally know THREE SAHD's I've changed the word motherhood to stay-at-home parenthood. The guys have it harder because they are downed by EVERYONE questioning their manhood... I mean, hello - they are men! How offensive can it be to take stabs at the core of your being - in addition to the crap that is heaped on the moms for being lazy, lacking ambition, etc, etc...
I don't care if this woman spoke sanity and delivered positive messages for the bulk of her career BEFORE THIS. From this point on, the broad needs a B^tch slap because what she said will negatively affect countless families who are doing what so many more (too many) families have CHOSEN NOT TO DO... and that is to put their family first.
Screw Dr Laura... I would GLADLY go toe to toe with that irresponsible shrew.
-
- +0
-
-
written by thezsdad, February 27, 2010
BikiniMom, I like your way of thinking.
And Zerzix, you're as entitled to your opinion as we are to ours--and to express it. I hope you won't stop partic**ating. No one says we all have to agree, and it's obviously many of us never will. Such is life...
And Zerzix, you're as entitled to your opinion as we are to ours--and to express it. I hope you won't stop partic**ating. No one says we all have to agree, and it's obviously many of us never will. Such is life...
-
- +0
-
-
written by BikiniMom, February 27, 2010
Thezsdad - everyone is entitled to their opinion, as you pointed out ...both online and IRL. However, once a body has been given (or earned) a degree of influence they really need to learn to chew on their words/actions just a bit more carefully than most because of this influence as it bears a larger degree of personal responsibility. This doesn't mean that a body isn't allowed to screw up on occasion. Heck let ye amongst you who hasn't committed THAT sin be the first to cast a stone and I will major duck but BIGTIME! LOL
I really don't care that this Dr Laura person's (who is a seasoned veteran when it comes to personal responsibility regarding her influence over her audience) article/commentary whathaveyou had something positive and common sense within it. How many of us who have been married and had children haven't figured out by the time our child is say, 7 that just because X,Y,Z worked for our parents or our in-laws or our friends or the parenting magazine article swore up and down that it would work for us when reality hit our home... IT DID NOT WORK. So what did we do? We shifted gears and adjusted the best that we could. Hell, we all know that children don't come with an instruction manual at the other end of the umbilical cord. Even mom's find that nasty reality shortly after they hand us the baby. Some of us find it out way sooner than others, but believe you me WE FIND OUT!
Now I will most likely be asked to hand over my "Mom-card" but guess what, I don't give a fat rat's behind. This is more important than hiding one of our best-kept secrets from "the boys".
IMHO Even though ya'll are all watching football in your mancaves on Mars and we are gettin' our nails done on Venus, we are all of us on the same side: we put our families first. So ANY press or media/etc that is damaging to our families or has the potential to tear us down should be exposed and dealt with accordingly.
Just my opinion anyways, and my opinion is no different than anybody else's (insert whatever orifice is applicable).
I really don't care that this Dr Laura person's (who is a seasoned veteran when it comes to personal responsibility regarding her influence over her audience) article/commentary whathaveyou had something positive and common sense within it. How many of us who have been married and had children haven't figured out by the time our child is say, 7 that just because X,Y,Z worked for our parents or our in-laws or our friends or the parenting magazine article swore up and down that it would work for us when reality hit our home... IT DID NOT WORK. So what did we do? We shifted gears and adjusted the best that we could. Hell, we all know that children don't come with an instruction manual at the other end of the umbilical cord. Even mom's find that nasty reality shortly after they hand us the baby. Some of us find it out way sooner than others, but believe you me WE FIND OUT!
Now I will most likely be asked to hand over my "Mom-card" but guess what, I don't give a fat rat's behind. This is more important than hiding one of our best-kept secrets from "the boys".
IMHO Even though ya'll are all watching football in your mancaves on Mars and we are gettin' our nails done on Venus, we are all of us on the same side: we put our families first. So ANY press or media/etc that is damaging to our families or has the potential to tear us down should be exposed and dealt with accordingly.
Just my opinion anyways, and my opinion is no different than anybody else's (insert whatever orifice is applicable).
-
- +0
-
-
written by Daddy Files, February 27, 2010
You can say whatever you want. However, you can't say whatever you want and expect everyone to just sit back and accept it.
There are consequences to the things you say. What's so hard to understand about that?
There are consequences to the things you say. What's so hard to understand about that?
-
- +1
-
-
written by DaddyIsPerplexed, March 04, 2010
In line with Daddy Files and others, it's not so much that there are consequences as there is a need to defend one's position. Too much political discourse is little more than people offering their views, then 'defending' those views with naught but a "well that's my opinion and I'm entitled to it." Most assuredly you are entitled to it, but you're also expected to explain and defend your position!
Hopefully you won't pack your bags and head off to more verdant pastures. A multiplicity of views always contributes to better dialog.
Hopefully you won't pack your bags and head off to more verdant pastures. A multiplicity of views always contributes to better dialog.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Wrath66, March 15, 2010
I find Dr. Laura's position to be ignorant and archaic. As a soon-to-be SAHD to a Baby Grrl!™ I couldn't agree with you more. I have an intelligent, successful, self-assured wife and I'd like to think I'm a talented, successful, self-assured guy. My staying at home was actually her idea and we both couldn't be happier about it.
Chris
Wrath66.com
Now with more baby sh*t™
Chris
Wrath66.com
Now with more baby sh*t™
-
- +0
-
-
written by Moby Home Maker, March 16, 2010
Tell Dr. Laura to put her shirt back on and cover up that nasty chest...(Remember those horrifying sex pics??)
Honey, if you got a job for me--I'll leave Home in a second!!!
In truth, as crappy as being laid off has been, the time I have had to spend real quality time with my kids, I would never trade!!!
Quick question: is that Dr. Laura in the video, or "Sue Sylvester" from Glee???
Honey, if you got a job for me--I'll leave Home in a second!!!
In truth, as crappy as being laid off has been, the time I have had to spend real quality time with my kids, I would never trade!!!
Quick question: is that Dr. Laura in the video, or "Sue Sylvester" from Glee???
-
- +0
-
-
written by Robyn, March 27, 2010
My husband has pretty much been a stay at home dad for over a year now. I was the one who stayed at home for almost 7 years beforehand. While I don't agree with her on everything, I think that when she basically asked "is it working in your situation", she brought up a good point! My dad would have been an awful stay at home parent. He really didn't like being around us at all. My husband is a great one! It's taken some adjustment for sure, and I (personally - though certainly I am NOT speaking for all women here - we each have a different situation and point of view) would have been heartbroken to leave them at home with him when they were infants - and he would have not liked it either... But now, at this point in our lives, it just works! For us and our situation! I think it's very true that you have to do what works best in your own family! Each of us are different! I'm thankful that while we never antic**ated this chapter in our lives, he's an awesome stay at home dad! Everyone says so.. not just me! 
-
- +0
-
-
written by Trey Burley, April 18, 2010
That was a good case of double speak. True, there are no absolutes in life in any sitautation. However in this case I think her old fashioned senseabilities are incorrect and it's the exception that would be the bad SAHD, instead of the rule.
I liked her careful placement of the Harley mug though.
I liked her careful placement of the Harley mug though.
-
- +0
-
-
written by johncaveosborne, April 23, 2010
i'm always late to the party. in this case, only by a coupla months, though! dr. laura? sounds like an extreme case of penis envy to me.
-
- +0
-
-
Write a comment
I don't need to tell how my wife felt about that, she already did. http://randommommy.blogspot.co...e-mom.html