Is it just me or is Western society arranged so as to make it awkward for Dads to be involved in their kids lives (beyond watching them play football or playing x-box with them)?
I get suspicious looks when I’m watching over my kids in the swimming pool or at the playground or skatepark. I get sideways glances from all the Mums when I come onto school ground to pick up kids after school. (I’d like to think they’re checkin’ me out. I’d rather not believe that I actually look like a predator!)
Over the last few days, I’ve been busy trying to organise the latest batch of playdates for my boys, it being the second week of their Spring school holidays here in Australia. Again, I’m amazed at the coldness I receive when I call a school Mum about my boy playing with her boy. [No my boy is well-liked, so it's not that]
Admittedly, it’s a form of cold-calling; the phone rings out of the blue and there’s this deep (cultured 
) voice on the other end asking if Johnny can come over to play.
But the Mums (and Dads) that know me are only too happy to meet up at the park or let me take their kid to the movies with mine. Even today, a Mum I’ve only known for this year since Youngest Son moved to her son’s school - she let me take her son to the pool for a few hours. That’s an enormous amount of trust she invested in me and weirdly, I feel privileged that she did.
But usually all I’m doing is asking if Johnny can come to a movie, or meet us at a park for a couple of hours, or to a party…
Anyway, I’m rambling away from my point. My point is the coldness (and knockbacks) I receive when I call, compared to the warmth my wife receives on the odd occasion she does it. In our house I’m Master of the Offspring Social Calendar, but increasingly I’m asking her to make the call for this reason.
It shouldn’t be that way.
The thing that really got up my nose today (and I know it’s petty, but … hey … I’m petty) was receiving a list of contact details for other kids in Youngest Son’s class, which instead of having a column for “Parents’” had one for “Mums“. Is this what Loose Associations calls ‘acceptable prejudice’?
Or should I build a bridge and get over it?
You be the Judge. (And I’ll continue to think what I like and be annoyed by this. :) )
8 responses so far ↓
jonathan // Oct 1, 2008 at 11:43 pm
Pete, I know where you’re coming from. I believe your perceptions are correct. I can excuse it though. Observe nature, and most mammals shield their offspring from males. I’m a bit of an elitist and like to think we are a cut above most mammals, but face it, the majority of the predatory acts committed are done by men.
There are certainly many good fathers and good men out there. Men that would lay down there lives to protect children, even ones not of there own, but it takes just a few bad ones to make a parent leery.
I guess, I’m saying I can excuse the protective nature of parents and the stray looks we get. However, I’m not excusing the list for mums. That sort of list makes father’s feel excluded, as it obviously has done to you. I bet your not alone.
BTW… There used to be an option to receive notification when other comments were given. I can’t find it anymore. Has it been removed?
jonathan // Oct 2, 2008 at 8:01 am
On a different note, I bought “The Five Love Languages of Children” today, because of your Whetstone article–looking forward to reading it.
Pete // Oct 2, 2008 at 8:33 am
Thanks mate. First up, the other comments option HAS disappeared. Wordpress (the platform for this blog) keeps upgrading, so maybe they removed it. I’ll go looking!
Second well done on the purchase of that book. Would love to hear what you think about it (a Pippenger Blog Post or 2???)
3rd, I totally hear you about protectiveness of kids. This post was one of those sput-of-the-moment I’m-ticked-off rants you look back at 20 minutes later and realise was a little unbalanced; I’d taken things too personally. But I’ll let the post stand, coz that’s how I felt at that moment.
But hey. I applaud parents for protecting their kids. We had a Mum/Mom who constantly made excuses for why her son couldn’t play with ours. Finally (after 9 months) it got back to us through a mutual contact that she simply didn’t know us, couldn’t trust strangers with her kids but was too embarrassed to say that to us. We were like “WE TOTALLY UNDERSTAND, LADY.” So yeah, the reality is there ARE predators out there and we need to protect our kids.
Gautam // Oct 2, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Gender roles in society are very rigid and are sort of engraved in it! When a particular gender tries to act out of it, it gets all complicated and like it is, human mind can’t handle it when they see something that is not the norm. The only option then is to either classify it or not accept it.
For instance men who indulge in a lot of shopping and skin care are classified as Metrosexuals. Why can’t they just be men like others..?? Its the human mind to brain! We are born with a clear head, but built stereotypes based on what we see around us. What we see around is nothing but what other men or women think is “normal”. The whole problem is that no matter what there will always be the fine line. Strange men will still have a higher probability of being a paedophile then women. (nothing to do with you however). At the end its the roles that society has given is that is to blame. Its a bit constraint and suffocating, that’s what they thought was best for us!
The problem gets worse, just when you start to think that society is starting to accept roles outside the norms, which may seem the case, its not! Societies are just getting more and more individualistic in nature, which means every person for himself and his/her family. They are not accepting roles changes, but they are just ignorant about it as they do not want to relate to it. Which is worse because not only are they not accepting it, but simply do not want to add to its acceptance!
Its all funny how the human mind works! Trust is based on gender, gender roles are defined by people and people don’t to trust others!
Pete // Oct 3, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Gautam you make some very astute points there, bro. Thanks!
I’ll see it as a game now and just enjoy being unusual!
Mad Cow // Oct 4, 2008 at 5:07 pm
Gautam - I so agree with you. Particularly the “individualistic nature” - so sad, but so true.
Funny you bring this up now, Pete. We went to a bbq with some close friends during the week. They have a son and a 4yo daughter (tiny) who just loves my Pete.
I was otherwise indisposed with a baby, whilst DH was racing around like a 4 year old himself and chasing the other kids - who had been nagging him to chase them.
All five kids were having a great time (oh, 4 kids and my husband! :D), but I did note the looks on some faces sitting on the outskirts (and not racing around the playground with their kids).
Seriously, women - one can only assume mums - with concerned looks and actually looking around to see if the mother’s of these kids being chased were aware of what was going on.
I didn’t tell DH, but it was really disappointing. The kids having the most fun where these kids!
Its a sad indictment, but as Jonathan said, unfortunatley, most acts against kids are done by males ….
What do you do?
Paul // Oct 10, 2008 at 11:18 am
it’s an interesting statistic that the most likely person to kill a child is HIS MOTHER. (not a stranger, not a man.)
WOMEN would not tolerate this kind of prejudice against fathers if it were directed at them.
Pete // Oct 10, 2008 at 7:12 pm
I don’t think any of us like prejudice and that was my experience of it for the week. I’m obviously struggling to tolerate it myself.
Leave a Comment