Is anybody else angry about Cameron blaming single parents for the riots?

not just single women who have kids....

Iggly has summed it up. Single mothers, often deserted by the men, are being blamed by misogynists (there's no other word for it) for 'social breakdown'- which is in fact represented by the selfish attitudes of the men involved. Yet apart from the odd bit of cant about 'fatherless families', this is ignored. For men in particular in this society, there's always something better, someone younger and 'fitter', more time 'for yourself', more time down the pub. There's a reason you don't usually see women buggering off into the ether with new partners leaving dad to look after the kids, and that is that women are a. socialised to care and b. seem to have a lot more resistance to the individualism and selfish 'achieve/enjoy' rhetoric that abounds in the Western world.

I find it quite repulsive that the Right (and it is mostly them- in fact pretty much only them) have twisted the facts of a plethora of sad contemporary situations to create a caricature of a man-eating-then-spitting-out, selfish Norma Bates style single mum who breeds feral young and squats brooding over them, like some sort of Queen Spider. Usually ensconced on a council estate where she can also suck up money from righteous 'taxpayers'.

There may well be disadvantages to bringing up a kid alone. God knows I am feeling them tonight and I am a divorced mum with a 50:50 custody arrangement so not a true 'single mother' but I do have no respite from another adult when my boys are with me and god does it get draining.

however, I constantly read posts on here where the father behaves appallingly in 'happily married' couples: does nothing, behaves like another kid.

I think what single mother haters really hate, is women, not single women who have kids. Because women are to blame for reproduction, and for not 'keeping their man'. It stinks to high heaven.

If most are bringing up considerate, well behaved children, they why are we a problem? You get some awful people in the world, some are brought up by one or two parents.

Most children in single parents households are not in poverty, some are but so are some children with two parents. You are saying it's not ideal but someone else might prefer to not want to live with their partner anymore so it's their ideal. What is it you object to?

Yes, I have read the link. There's a difference between blaming single parents for the world's woes (which I don't - most single parents would rather someone had stayed around to help them and do a perfectly good job of bringing up considerate, well behaved children) and thinking that single parenthood is not an ideal. If you don't think it is an ideal situation, then I think you should be entitled to discuss it without the black and white comments that either condemn all single parents as feckless and blameworthy or refuse even to consider whether something can be done to help more parents bring up their children together. You could say it's the difference between saying single parents are to blame and saying that the society we live in is to blame and a large number of single parents living in poverty and isolation is one of the symptoms of that.

Rabbitstew, have you had chance to read the link that Solopower put up, it might open your eyes a bit.

I think it is a shame if it is a trend which cannot be stopped (albeit I don't think punishing single parents and therefore at the same time their children, and blaming them for all society's ills, is a good way to reverse the trend!!!!!). I also can't help wondering why the rates of single parenthood are so high in this country compared to elsewhere in Europe. Is it because other European countries actually discriminate even more against single parents than we do in the UK? Or are there other attitudes, expectations, state interventions, or ways in which other societies are set up which enable more nuclear families to stick together elsewhere than is the case here?

If you'd like some facts to throw in their faces, read this article:

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/19/single-mothers-uk-riots-tanya-gold

There are all sorts of reasons people end up raising children alone. The teenage single mum getting pregnant to get a council house and benefits is a myth. Many young girls would have hoped the father stuck around. The percentage are very low too and not a threat to the tory people or society.

Many single parents are older and divorced for one reason or another. Plenty are supporting their children with minimal state help, just child benefit and tax credits which are also paid to women in long term relationships.

Even before the riots they were having a go at single parents, they always do, the riots have just given them ammunition. They haven't a clue who some of the perpetrators are let alone their family background.

I haven't a clue whether I have raised my DD to not want a long term relationship. I have taught her to be independent and that you need to be able to pay your own way in life. So far so good, she has respect for herself which isn't always the case with teenage girls is it?

Surely it's not the fault of the single parent who bothered to stick around and raise their child but of the parent who fucked off?

I don't think you can stop the trend, unless you stop educating girls and make women unemployable. Wanting a long term relationship i.e finding someone you are perfectly happy with is different from needing a long term relationship to feed your children.

adamschic - one thing single parent families do not set a good model for is the model of a long-lasting, committed, stable adult relationship. As a result, the children of single parents are statistically less likely to have a long lasting, committed, stable relationship themselves in adulthood. This is not a good thing in my opinion - bringing up children alone is extremely hard work and can be very lonely and complicated, and frankly a lot of people aren't up to the job, albeit that many do a fantastic job and many do a better job alone than they would have done with the useless partner they made the mistake of having children with. As a result, as the generations go by, more and more people seem to have become very poor at establishing long term, committed and stable relationships, or worse, seem to have stopped believing that they are even possible or desirable. How would you stop this trend, or do you not believe that more people than is currently the case are capable of establishing a long-term, stable and committed relationship with someone?

'one kid got away with calling david cameron a nob (on air) was fantastic'

was he interviewed after coming out of one of these midnight courts?

Yes I'm very angry. There are many single parent households and the only thing that they have in common is that there is only one adult living with the children.

Tories tarr everyone in this situation with the same brush. I don't know about the stats as to whether crimes are committed by kids from one parent households.

How about finding out when the parents stopped living together and could these kids have turned out wrong because the male that has left fucked them up before he left etc.

there was a fab interview from teenagers on this week from radio london in response to the 'no dad' theory

on kid got away with calling david cameron a nob (on air) was fantastic

the london youths interviewed have not been fairly represented in the media.

Funny trumpet-what a blast!

The thing is that more LP's work than married women after a certain age of their children. All they are doing is blaming a silent group of people, made up of mostly women and children. It's called scapegoating isn't it. And the media and too many of the population think it is true.

Ok, so I see (Trompette appears to be problematic, too).

Maybe people should only get a vote if they can actually spell the name of the current Prime Minister.

so, is it poverty in families that they are blaming or having one parent, instead of two, at home, that they are blaming? or is it ok for mum and dad to be on the dole? but not just mum?

Lego - they don't bother to differentiate because people from "broken homes" are statistically more likely to be on benefits and because rather than finance broken homes, they would prefer to prevent poor people from breaking up their homes in the first place, because the result tends to be even greater poverty (and a repetition by the children of the poor relationship choices of their parents, so continuing the cycle of poverty and family breakdown for generation after generation). As I said, I'll bet they wouldn't give a toss if they didn't have to pay for the broken homes, even though wealthy people harm their children just as much when they make poor choices of partner.

obviously not trumpet

They do not differentiate specifically between people on benefits and single parents in the news. They say [tories]...'broken homes' or 'scroungers'.

Well said, CogitoErgoSometimes.

Lego, can you really not spell 'Cameron'?

Iain Duncan Smith blames them for everything.

Single parents are not blamed for everything. Poor single parents are blamed for everything. The Tories wouldn't direct moral opprobrium at single parents if the only people who could become single parents were those who could afford to finance that lifestyle without the help of the State.

well, why don't they print the numbers of rioters who come from LP families then? And then they can make a judgement. Along with, income, geographical residence etc etc etc etc.