Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (53913)	6/22/1999 1:10:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

The research coming out is full of the negative effects of absent fathers. Well that may be, but don't you agree that by dwelling on the financial aspect of absent fathers they miss the point they are trying to convey, and imply that with enough money a father is not necessary. Oh well, we now have a whole generation where the popular culture dismissed fatherhood as an unessential element to the home, or even a nuisance factor. Well I don't know, but fwiw I am wondering if this dwelling on the media with respect to fatherhood isn't the same thing as dwelling on the media with respect to lack of respect for the family. As I said yesterday (and you agreed, I think), the family was at its worst in the 70s I think with the huge generation gap. TV is worse now, but families were worse then, imo. So whats up with this fatherhood thing... I think in the 60s for example fathers didn't participate much with their children. That was a key issue for the womens lib movement of the 70s wasn't it... that moms had to do everything... so are we really in a position today where fatherhood is at its lowest point with respect to society's expectations ... I kinda doubt it. Maybe TV is at its lowest point but that is just TV....?