Continued discussion about gender inequality in LDS church

[Marcus]

Bypassing the troll, yet again!!...

The bond between a mother and her child is qualitatively different.

Regards,
MG

Said a man.

As per usual, your assertion is not based on facts.

From the marketplace to the workplace, it is mothers who are still perceived as having that “special bond” with their children. This is compounded by advertising and the widely held expectation that it will be mothers who take parental leave.

But in a rapidly changing society, is there really any reason to assume that mothers are any more suited to take care of their children than fathers? Some will argue that a superior “maternal instinct” is part of a woman’s biology. But do pregnancy, hormones or parenting experiences really create a stronger bond? Let’s take a look at the scientific evidence.

Some scholars argue that the relationship between parents and children can begin before birth. They claim that such “antenatal bonding” – feeling connected to the unborn baby – is an important predictor of the infant-mother relationship. However, the actual evidence linking feelings about the baby during pregnancy with postnatal behaviour is inconsistent, so it’s not clear how – or even if – such feelings influence later relationships.

But even if it is shown to be the case, another problem is that most of the research in this area has been conducted with mothers. We are now also starting to understand that fathers develop antenatal relationships too. It is also clear that not having the experience of pregnancy at all doesn’t mean that later relationships are compromised – as those who have adopted a child or started a family through surrogacy arrangements know.

This article reflects modern learning, not the male-world view that has dominated the past 75 years.

A huge problem when it comes to understanding the differences – and similarities – between fathers and mothers is that most research on bonding doesn’t directly compare the two. This is likely to be because mothers still stay home with the child more often than fathers, and researchers might have difficulties finding enough households where fathers are in the role of a primary caregiver. So we don’t really know whether fathers interacting with their babies differently to mothers is about their biological differences or about roles taken in relation to breadwinning and child rearing.

So your assertion is likely driven by your existing in a patriarchal societal bubble with “traditional” and old fashioned gender roles. Rather than it being an inescapable fact. In a society where fathers stayed at home and mothers went out to work, you’d see the qualitative difference in bonding in favour of fathers. It’s about quality time spent with your offspring, not a gender based differential.

Thanks for the link, and for the background on how methodology can effect results. (and you didn't link-and-run!! Someone could learn from that. : D )

[I Have Questions]

Interestingly on this topic, the disciplinary councils held in the Church are all-male, because Stake High Councillors are all-male. So when considering a member’s infractions, only a male view is considered. Even if the member being judged is female. Imagine that dynamic in a real world setting. Imagine a woman is on trial for killing her husband, and the judge and jury were all-male. Would that be considered a fair and balanced body?

High Council

A group of 12 men called to help oversee the work of the Church in a stake. These high councilors work under the direction of the stake president and help train and supervise stake personnel or programs. The high council also convenes as a disciplinary council in cases when serious sin may affect someone’s Church membership.

Women aren’t entrusted with sitting on Church disciplinary councils, simply on the basis that they are female.