J
JimG
Guest
You will not get strong men unless you pay attention to boys.
- Status
Amen to that. I think it can be reasonably posited that some of the present trend to prescribe ADD/ADHD medicine may be, even if unintended, to “medicate the boy out of them”, rendering them more docile and able to sit still and concentrate, more like girls tend to do.
An enjoyable book, and one we have used from time to time in homeschooling, is this one. We love it!
https://www.amazon.com/Dangerous-Book-Boys-Conn-Iggulden/dp/0062208977
I have to wonder if this book would pass muster in any of our public schools these days.
Last edited:
E
edwest211
Guest
L
Lifeisbeautiful3
Guest
This works until a person is tasked with performing the roles of both sexes. A person with children married to someone with a debilitating illness, in a coma, or who departs his family. In these settings, we may well wish that the remaining parent had been instilled with a balanced perspective to help develop the next generation with a love for Jesus, moral character, physical fortitude, and mental strength. These teachings will not come from a person raised to be exclusively masculine or feminine
E
edwest211
Guest
That last sentence does not ring true.
C
CRV
Guest
There is a new book out on this topic Esto Vir written by a priest. I have not read it, but the Description says it all.
I
Irishmom2
Guest
Please explain why it is not true.
E
edwest211
Guest
Men are exclusively masculine. Even a man without a formal education will do whatever is necessary to care for someone and their children.
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
You mean someone who is all masculine can’t love Jesus, have moral character, physical fortitude and mental strength? Is there something evil in masculinity that prevents those character traits? and the same for a woman who is all feminine, she can’t have those characteristics because of femininity?
I think it is better to know what is true in that statement?
Last edited:
I
Irishmom2
Guest
No, that’s not how it works. edwest made a comment which I questioned.
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
I’m not seeing this at all. Please explain what this means.
O
on_the_hill
Guest
I get where you’re coming from. However, being able to sit and concentrate is hardly something we expect only of girls. First of all, both boys and girls have been required to sit still and concentrate in classrooms for about the past…200 years? 400 years? Ever since there were classrooms?
Second of all, NOT being able to sit still and concentrate really limits a person’s career options. Forget about medicine, sciences, research, computer programming, mathematics…basically any job that requires focus on demand.
Third of all, when I coached soccer there were a couple boys who have ADHD. Even when they’re running around, expending all that energy, “being boys,” they’re still incapable of following simple directions. I’ve actually seen the helplessness in their eyes when they’re out of control.
Fourth of all, I really, really wish someone had known to medicate me when I was a teenager and couldn’t keep my brain in one place long enough to solve algebra problems, or balance chemical equations, or read my history books. Maybe I coulda been a doctor, or a scientist, or…no, not a computer programmer.
O
on_the_hill
Guest
I don’t understand this. Did someone make the connection that men without formal educations can’t care for others? And what’s masculine? I’m masculine, but I hate working on cars, have no interest in hunting, don’t play poker, and don’t care for bourbon…I do like dark heavy beer, old Hollywood musicals, jazz, am an Eagle Scout, like DIY projects, and pretty women.
Last edited:
O
on_the_hill
Guest
For example, my wife and high school daughter said, “Boys will be boys,” when a few of her guy friends took off their clothes and ran naked around the neighborhood one night. I can still hear the one dad, “YOU GET YOUR CLOTHES ON AND GET BACK HERE THIS INSTANT!!!”
Z
Zaccheus
Guest
I fail to see how ‘exclusively masculine’ or ‘exclusively feminine’ prevents one from having ’ love for Jesus, moral character, physical fortitude, and mental strength.’
I’m not suggesting that ADD/ADHD medication is never called for (for either boys or girls), but I think it is way over-prescribed these days. And school environments seem to have a “preferential option” for girls.
Pope Pius XI warned us about coeducation in his encyclical Divini illius magistri (1929), and basic human nature hasn’t changed since then. Boys learn differently from girls, and there are many other reasons why single-sex education is preferable. Even some public schools are introducing single-sex programs.
Granted, single-sex Catholic education “across the board” is not possible in the present environment — even a troglodyte like me can see thisIt is hard enough financing Catholic schools as it is. However, it behooves teachers at least to recognize the gender difference in education, and to tailor the education accordingly, to the extent that is possible.
http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-x...p-xi_enc_31121929_divini-illius-magistri.html
O
on_the_hill
Guest
No disagreement from me—and there are a lot of things teachers should be doing to the extent possible.
Last edited:
P
PJH_74
Guest
As someone who is raising a 7 year old boy, and one has been diagnosed as an adult with ADD; let me clarify what it means and how it is medicated. It actually means that a person has more difficulty than others taking themselves away from a preferred activity. In a sense the person over concentrates and is difficult to distract. The medication for ADD is usually a stimulant; there’s no medicating them into docility here.
As for the article, what is this?
So only because of the “post-industrial world” not requiring hard labor, women are now somehow able to achieve some equality? I’m sorry that is a pretentious and pompous assertion. There is no reason other than patriarchal tradition to justify such thinking. The average woman may be less strong, but some are as strong as men. We have minds and there’s no reason we could not lead that labor. The final and most ridiculous thing is that women were excluded from “white” collar jobs just as much, we were too emotional or required a man’s guidance to make real decisions.
So what kind of men are we trying to raise? Only stoic ones, provider of the food, and defender of the universe? Don’t get me wrong, there are times when man to boy time is important. But this writer certainly can’t see past “traditional” male behavior as being the foundation of a stable family. What is wrong with a husband being the sensitive stay at home parent and the wife the bread winner? Why is anything too “effeminate”. We certainly don’t look down in a similar fashion when girls act more masculine, e.g. “tom boys”. I watched as our male gym teacher sent boys over to the girls side to kneel in on a ribbed mat and hold hands if more than one of them failed to emerge from the locker room on time. He claimed they must have been playing “grab butt”. Homophobic humiliation is no way to raise a “real” man.
I’m in no way saying a man can’t inhabit a “traditional” role nor a woman the same. But there is no reason to ostracize a man who chooses otherwise. It is not necessarily “gay” to be into fashion or emotional. You aren’t some unrealized male if you stay home to raise the kids. Saying “boys will be boys” to write off inappropriate behavior is a farce. If you can’t tolerate it from your daughter, then it is out of line.
Last edited:
- Status