This is happening in sweden right now, through “genuspedagogik”, gender pedagogics. Basically an experiement at our daycare-centers to train our boys to be more in touch with their emotions and communicationsksills, and girls to take more room.

I too reacted to the biological? argument by jane that some men just are unloving fathers. I dont believe in any biological explanations, and I can understand your response about emotional training rather than agreeing to that cul de sac .

Still I see wonderful loving fathers all around me, I believe its a big exaggeration to claim that men today in general needs to be trained for fatherhood. The male genderoll today is much softer than it was for only 100 or even 50 years ago, mainly because we can live it with less emotional effort. (thanks to technological and political, and other wellfare advances). The need to supress our feelings to get by in everyday life are not as strong as it once was.

But Im sure that training emotional and social intelligence would not hurt, neither men nor women.

Having fair laws is a huge first step, and it makes me happy to learn that Canada has made good progress in that area. If the laws are fair, then it is indeed possible for fathers to show up and participate in their children’s lives, instead of only paying child support. However, if courts and laws are still working against men in a certain country, then it’s quite possible even for dedicated fathers to be shut out.

The other important area is teaching men how to form and maintain nurturing relationships. Many men don’t know how to do this, because they’ve never practiced or been taught how to. Maybe that’s what you’ve noticed when you say that some men seem to “have it” and some don’t.

So who should teach men these skills? This is a very good question. Who taught women the skills needed to join the labor force? I believe the answer lies in our educational system. Why not teach emotional intelligence skills and relationship skills in schools? Daniel Goleman, author of Emotional Intelligence (1996) and Social Intelligence (2006), suggests that we add these subjects in regular schools. I agree.

Pelle

It must be very difficult for men to pay money out to women they no longer love, even for the sake of the children. Perhaps this is why there are so many deadbeat dads. Still, a far better solution, is for both men and women to be financially independent and both to take equal responsibility for their children. And this is definitely the direction that things are going in around here. It is wonderful to see men that are generous and loving and have their children’s best interests at heart, and to know that they are so important in their children’s lives in a very primary way. It is one of those things though, this importance comes from being actively involved, and the initiative to get involved and stay involved is one that comes from withing. I don’t know what makes men able to show up in this capacity. I don’t think however it is diminshed or increased as a function of ‘feminism’. I think it is a function of the man, himself. Some men have it and some don’t, and there are many factors that would play into this. The ones who don’t might ‘blame’ feminism for their predicament, or they might blame all the women in their lives, or the world in general….. but the ones who do have it, are not likely to get into the blame thing, they are likely just to keep on loving and being present, no matter what. I can tell you that THIS loving presence does not go unnoticed either by most women, or more importantly, by their children. Men are very important in family lives in so many different ways. It is wonderful when they step up to the plate with confidence and courage and that beautiful masculine caring love.

Pelle you write: “we need to teach men how to form and maintain close, nurturing bonds.”
Who do you thing ‘we’ is that should do the ‘teaching’? and what do you think this ‘teaching’ would look like? How would we get on to this project?
Jane

Now I understand what you mean, and I agree that there is a lot more pressure on a man to get back into the workforce. In fact, an unemployed man faces an increased risk of divorce as the weeks and months go by, while an unemployed woman faces a *decreased* risk of divorce over time.

Pelle

Do you really feel that this is generally assumed? Do people not also assume that an unemployed man may have been fired and is looking for a new job?

Pelle

Yes, I think that is very likely, although we’d have to wait and see to know for sure.

Even if we are freed from gender roles, we would still be dealing with biological factors, and IMO those factors would make it likely that men and women would make different choices (on a group level).

I think many men and many women want to combine work and a family (i.e. work *and* raise their children). However, I think women on average want to spend more hours per week staying home with their children than men do, and I think very few men will ever choose to be full-time homemakers.

We will never go backwards in time, to a traditional society where men and women had completely different roles. We won’t see that kind of black and white scenario, the differences between men and women will be more like shades of gray.

Pelle

Are you saying that men, as a group, would not choose to stay at home with their children to the same extent as women, as a group, even if both were freed of their gender roles?