steve biddulph - misogynist bully?

[workstostaysane]

half way through 'raising babies' he seems to be a big fat bully to me.
anyone else??

I see - so are you staying as GS now? I didn't watch Grange Hill,so I'll never remember who you are!

I must say it was an enormous relief to read his book. at the time I was trying to decide about childcare and all the books/articles I read and all the people I spoke to just sat on the fence and said "well here are the options, you could do this and you could do that, or the other" and no-one said what they thought.
so it was hugely refreshing to read someone say "I think THIS i.e. under threes should not be in full time nursery and this is why I think it" and that was v helpful because I could test my own opinion against that, did I agree or not?
I think he has an interesting perspective about the place of the family and particularly children in our society.
I don't think by any stretch he attacks women who work, he just says he doesn't think it's a good idea and he quotes the studies that agree with him. good for him for sticking his head above the parapet imho.
(I had a baby in f/t nursery at the time I read that particular book)

I only read the article in the guardian about his "research" into childcare. Reading the article I thought that his researches didn't stand on a firm ground. Actually got very irritated (and I'm a sahm). Decided not to read anything else, but then I don't really do parenting gurus.

doubt it, katy. i'm showing you my softer side here because you were kind enough to take an interest in me, but i thought i might go and knock a few heads together on MN tonight. i've already left zammo weeping and stoned off his nut in the boys' toilets.

sorry I shold say he doesn't think it's a good idea for young children to be in f/t nursery. I don't think his views are misogynistic, fwiw I think his intentions are genuine

[shudders at memory of Baxter]

unquietdad, did you see i'd nominated you as one of my favourite names the other day? [geek]

i agree that full time nursery for small babies and possibly under 3's isn't the best option but even though he didn't have to convert me if still found him patronising and over emotional. and i really do hate his faux anecdotes. give me penelope leach any day.

didn't see that GS! but thanks

'self-satisfied, middle-brow apologist for sexism.'
yes yes yes.

all the studies he quotes say that the strength of the mother and child attachement is the single most important element for the healthy (whatever that is) development of the child.
soooo, in order to write an entire book slamming one type of childcare (he's way too prejudiced to even discuss others: nannies, childminders or any other help) you have to first assume that the mother child attachments of all working mothers is weak, fragile and vulnerable. if the attachment is strong and reliable, the child will do just fine, growing up with a role model of a motivated happy mother, as opposed to the needy bridget jones type singleton. ( don't get me wrong, i love bridget, i just wouldn't want to be her)

reading it is making me laugh out loud now - his world is sooo small and narrow minded its entertaining

I think his views are child centred. Agree with harpsi that he sticks his head above the parapet - what he has to say isn't currently fashionable but it's based around common sense, family, community rather than 'wrap around care' by instutions.

its not that he's not fashionable. he just plain misses the point. if you want to help people then you offer help about what needs doing ie: create a strong bond between you and your child. if you want to emotionally blackmail women who feel nervous about their choice or need to work then you tell them all the bad stuff that COULD happen if they use a nursery. may as well say there might be a kiddie fiddler living next door. you never know you know...
as for sticking his head above the parapet - preying on people's fears or anxieties is not brave, its easy, manipulative and nasty.

guaranteed to make lax dad's feel guity.

like penelope leach best

Yay worktostaysane, love your last post esp. preying on people's fears. Hate the way obnoxious people out to scaremonger are lauded for 'sticking their head about the parapet'. Jean Marie le Pen sticks his head above the parapet. It ain't necessarily a good thing to do - depends what you've got to say and whether you are trying to hurt.

The reason i disagree with this man is not because he's too 'unfashionable' to appeal to me. It's because he argues his case in a horrible dumbed down, opinion (rather than research) based, emotional way that i find objectionable.
There's no pragmatism, such as you find in penelope leach, no flexibility or room for real life testimony from parents struggling with difficult circumstances which might not lend themselves to his blueprint.
As for 'sticking his head over the parapet', he's been bombarded with book sales, multi-media interviews and more publicity than you can shake a stick at. so yes, well done him for doing a u-turn and making loads of money by contradicting himself.

I liked Raising Boys(esp that testosterone surge at 4 thing, which he says blocks up their ear canals which is why they go 'deaf' for a while) but I did get v frustrated with Raising Boys - think it's been propping up a wobbly cot for over a year which has been far more useful

oh deal with it!

the studies he quotes are wide ranging and continuing.

the primary attachment relationship (biddulph is wrong to characterise it exclusively as mother-child, could just as well be father-child/granny-chid/nanny child etc) IS massively important and has huge impact on adult mental health.

group daycare before the age of around 3 is not the best way to go according to countless studies.

the fact that he is right about that does not make him a mysoginist bully ffs.

Sophable - if you read closely, I think WTSS said similar things. However, you can be right but still come across as a bully. I don't see the contradiction here and it's this bit of her statement that hasn't been corrected yet.

but cristina, most women do have a choice...a good childminder is infinitely preferable to daycare....and accesible financially too.

but cristina, most women do have a choice...a good childminder is infinitely preferable to daycare....and accesible financially too.

Sophable - how simple your world is! Why don't you write a book too if you just KNOW that a good childminder is infinitely preferable to nursery. Let me tell you, though, you wouldn't get my money.

cristina...why is it not a choice?

i don't understand why it is wrong to submit that one on one (or one on 3 care...basically total consistency of care among a very small group) is better than group care with changing primary carers.

i am absolutely certain that one is better than the other.

so what? i'm to be condemned as awful for that?

the research is there to read and frankly, any knowledge of attachment theory backs it up in common sense terms.

I am not condemning mothers that have opted for daycare...i'm defending someone that backs one on one care, against accusations of misogeny

"all the studies he quotes say that the strength of the mother and child attachment is the single most important element for the healthy (whatever that is) development of the child."

Well, I think it would be quite difficult to disprove that. It's a no-brainer, surely?

I didn't think he came across as a bully. But it's a long time since I read any of his stuff.

As for his writing approach, if you want something sober, academic, etc., that's out there. He's selling books. If you don't like the way he writes, don't buy him, buy someone who is saying something similar (like Leach) and writes it in a different style, or someone who says something completely different, like SWMNBN and also sells a lot of books.

Aren't all parenting "gurus" preying on parents' insecurities and fears? Otherwise there'd be no need for them.

I have read SB's books and been to one of his talks. He comes across as very child-centred and genuine. He was very aware of the stark choices which face women and I would in no way label him as misogynistic. I think his primary concern is the way in which boys seem to be marginalised in society - as education systems seem geared to the way girls learn, rather than boys; how many boys are without male role models because of the breakdown of family life (as there are more absent fathers than there are absent mothers); how natural male tendencies in children (learning through rough play, etc.) are no longer acceptable, etc.

He has a boy and a girl of his own (adults now I would imagine), so I don't think his views are falsely skewed towards boys because of his own children.

calig is that she who mums net banned now?

i'm wondering about SWMNBN as an acronym