New Book Says Nannies Turn Boys Into Future Adulterers - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-29-2010, 08:49 AM   #1
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 05:14 PM
New Book Says Nannies Turn Boys Into Future Adulterers

I wonder what he says about fathers who "outsource" the care of their sons-or daughters. If anything. Another attempt to blame mothers-even for men who can't remain faithful? Mothers shouldn't work? How about men should keep it zipped.?



time.com
Parenting: Do Nannies Turn Boys into Future Adulterers?

By BELINDA LUSCOMBE Sat Mar 27, 1:15 pm ET

Mothers who outsource the care of their sons to other women may be inadvertently raising adulterers. Or so claims Dr. Dennis Friedman in a book that has kicked up a bit of a ruckus in Britain. A Fellow of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the doctor argues that men become womanizers because their mothers left them with nannies.

According to Friedman, having two women care for a baby boy may cause his little brain to internalize the idea that there are multiple females to meet his needs. "It introduces him to the concept of the other woman," he said in London's Daily Telegraph. He explicates the relationship in his book The Unsolicited Gift: Why We Do The Things We Do, which explores how a mother's love for her offspring can determine how those children behave as adults.

Girls are affected by nannies too. Not having her mother around creates in the infant female a "vacuum of need," says Friedman, which she might try to fill in later life with substance abuse or promiscuity - presumably with those married men in her social circle who were also raised by nannies.

But it is the thesis concerning boys that has been more controversial. Having two maternal objects, says Friedman, "creates a division in [the boy's] mind between the woman he knows to be his natural mother and the woman with whom he has a real hands-on relationship: the woman who bathes him and takes him to the park, and with whom he feels completely at one." This dual-woman life, one for family and one for catering to his every need, might become a set pattern in his mind, so that when he grows up and feels like his needs are not being met, he strays beyond the home.

Friedman suggests mothers should not work, or if they must, should not return to work until their children are at least 1 year old. Critics, and many, many working mothers, quickly pointed out that he offers no statistics for his theory (as in, exactly how many nannies Tiger Woods must have had), nor does his proposal seem particularly practical, since many women have little choice but either to return to work after having children or to not feed said children. Additionally, it rankled many women that Friedman lays the blame for men's fidelity issues on females. If it's not the inattentive wife who drives a man into another woman's arms - it's his inattentive mother.

It also doesn't make developmental sense, says Dr. Jean Mercer, professor emerita of Psychology at Richard Stockton College in New Jersey, who specializes in infant development. "Babies don't form attachments solely to their mothers - they become attached also to fathers, grandparents, nannies, child-care providers, older brothers and sisters, or anyone else who interacts with them socially and frequently participates in care routines like feeding and bathing." These relationships are healthy and part of normal development. And becoming attached to a nanny doesn't equal becoming detached from a mother, or that the two are interchangeable. "A nanny or other person is added to the existing relationships most babies have."

It's unclear how wide a cross section of society Friedman used to draw his conclusions, but it's possible they may have been a bit skewed. His previous three books were explorations of the psychology of a small but prominent group of people with powerful matriarchs and lots and lots of nannies: the British royal family.
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2010, 08:57 AM   #2
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 04:14 PM
They give that title "Dr" to anyone these days, don't they?
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2010, 09:17 AM   #3
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 05:14 PM
Why do men cheat on their wives and girlfriends-or husbands and boyfriends. I'd like some real and honest thoughts on that from the males here. And of course from females on why women (and men if you wish) do, even though that's not the topic of this book.

If you're doing it because you're unhappy in the relationship, the relationship is broken, etc. then why not honestly confront that with the other person first? is cheating somehow easier than doing that? Of course there's the question of how many times that's the real issue vs other issues going on.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2010, 09:36 AM   #4
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 04:14 PM
I think there are many reasons, but they all boil down to selfishness. It doesn't matter if you're man or woman, almost every case I know of has come down to that...
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2010, 09:47 AM   #5
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 05:14 PM
Yes-talking to my mother and friends about it, about the Woods situation and the Jesse James one and just the topic in general( it's just how those fit into the context of that that interests me)..I always conclude that it all comes down to selfishness. The issue for me is the kids and how men or women justify that-do you mentally compartmentalize that and rationalize that your kids somehow aren't involved until you're caught and then the explanations have to happen if they're old enough. And you have to confront what you're done to them. Selfishness just causes massive amounts of denial and rationalizations and mental gymnastics I guess.

The other person in the relationship is a tough enough situation-but when kids are involved I just can't grasp that at all. I don't care to delve into their personal situation but when you feel and state publicly that your husband always has your back and now you finally know how that feels, it must feel like the most painful betrayal.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2010, 01:05 PM   #6
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 04:14 PM
Can't speak to nannies but French maids...

__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2010, 03:09 PM   #7
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 05:14 PM
i think it's a fairly natural impulse for men -- and perhaps some women -- to want to have sex with lots and lots of people. i think it's somewhat hardwired into the male sex drive, and i think it's supported by very basic biology. i don't think there's a man alive who is only attracted to his wife.

where the selfishness comes in is when men allow their impulses to override their higher level reasoning and they choose to engage in activity which they well know they could destroy their relationships and harm their families and children. as much as we are all animals, we can think and reason and make rational choices.

monogamy is very much a choice, and it might even be an unnatural choice, but i think it is a very rational one. there are enormous upsides to monogamy and in my experience it seems to be a fairly critical component of any successful long term relationship. open relationships generally don't tend to work, at least in what i've seen. sure, it's possible, but the commitment to monogamy enables what is in my opinion a much more admirable relationship.

so why do men like Tiger and Jessie James cheat? because they have the means to do so. and because they have decided that their momentary pleasure -- and that's not to be underestimated, the sex drive is a powerful thing -- is worth the risk it might pose to their relationships. it probably isn't even a commentary on their relationships with Elin or Sandra Bullock. they likely don't think that it harms the relationship at all because, 1) they assume Elin/Sandra will never find out, 2) they've likely made it clear to these women that it's "only sex" and because of their fame/fortune these other women aren't going to ask for anything more, 3) they're used to getting what they want and when they want it, and with getting away with anything and everything.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2010, 03:24 PM   #8
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 02:14 PM
I think you pretty much covered it.

also, it does not help when there are long periods of separation. Not that I am making excuses for Tiger's or Jesse's behavior.
I also believe it begins slowly. With just a casual drink or cup of coffee. Then once they have sex the first time, it gets a little easier. And then a lot easier.

The partner has some responsibility for this too. One should know if their is a distance or estrangement in their relationship. If they just ignore it, it can lead to the partner going outside of the relationship. I think good communication is the key to any successful relationship.
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2010, 04:57 PM   #9
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 11:14 PM
Largely it's what Irvine said, although occasionally it can happen because of something more than lust:

'I hated all the sneaking around' - The Irish Times - Wed, Jan 20, 2010
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2010, 08:43 PM   #10
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 476
Local Time: 06:14 PM
I remember Woody Allen's anticlimactic response to the media firestorm over his getting involved with Soon Yi. He dismissed it all, quoting Shakespeare (I think) just saying, "The heart wants what the heart wants". That infuriated people.
__________________
Knuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2010, 02:30 AM   #11
Blue Crack Addict
 
kafrun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Upside-down
Posts: 19,644
Local Time: 03:14 PM
To steal a thought from Jon Stewart: That theory is so ingenious, it almost doesn't make sense at all. A stretch, much?
__________________
kafrun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2010, 09:00 AM   #12
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 05:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knuckle View Post
I remember Woody Allen's anticlimactic response to the media firestorm over his getting involved with Soon Yi. He dismissed it all, quoting Shakespeare (I think) just saying, "The heart wants what the heart wants". That infuriated people.
Yeah-or maybe he's just a douchebag

Jesse James didn't even bother with coffee, if what "bombshell" says is true-he just used the MySpace and it was right down to business. Apparently he used his business as a recruiting tool and a place to do it and many of his employees were aware of that. He settled at least one sexual harassment suit.

I think the only distance in their relationship was when she was off working-and perhaps the distance between who he really was and who she thought he was. I think that second distance happens to many people.

Of course you can cheat with just an emotional affair that never becomes physical-and that can be much worse. In that case it has nothing to do with sex drive.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2010, 11:02 PM   #13
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 10:14 PM
The oft-repeated notion that it's a biological impulse for men but not women bugs the shit out of me.

Quote:
There is a well-known theory to the effect that men want to have sex with as many women as they can in order to perpetuate their own genetic legacy. The corresponding theory is that women want to have sex only in the context of a relationship or marriage, in order to ensure a protector for any children they might bear.

If this was an abiding natural truth, there would hardly be the need for the kind of intensive cultural pressure to restrict and control female sexuality that actually exists. Monogamy, broadly speaking, is an invention of a patriarchal world view, and its purpose is to ensure that no man need doubt he is the father of his children, born by his women.

If male polygamy is a biological imperative to ensure the survival of the superior males genes - because the superior male fights off all the competition - the equivalent biological drive in the female would be to engage in sex with as many men as possible during the conception period, so that the 'superior' sperm would be the one that made it through to fertilise the egg. It is to prevent this happening that men have placed such emphasis on monogamy through the centuries.
__________________
AliEnvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2010, 11:43 PM   #14
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 05:14 PM
^ i find that very interesting.

but why do you think that most men seem to be able to bounce from partner to partner without nary a thought, whereas this doesn't appear to be the case for women?

is the virgin/whore mentality we teach our daughters that powerful? is it all socialization?

and does the above mean anything in that it *isn't* a male biological imperative? that it might also be for women doesn't mean that many men really do have impulses to have sex as much as possible.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 08:42 AM   #15
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 05:14 PM
Now you can cheat all you want and just go into rehab and say you're a sex addict. Now Jesse James is-it seems to be the in thing for celebs and spouses of celebs. Non celebrities would probably do it more if they could afford it.

Sex addiction exists I suppose but it seems like an easy excuse for some people.
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com