Psychobabble

.... from Dr. Margand

Is the US really a child friendly society?

There is a growing discrepancy between the image of the US as a family oriented nation and the harsh reality of social policies that affect families. Many people are able to spend huge sums of money on fancy child care "needs" -- from baby strollers & Baby Einstein tapes, to expensive preschools and computerized educational toys for infants.
At the same time we have laws that prohibit (or at least discourage) parents from spending as much time with, or providing as much care for, their children as they might want to .

For example, most women with newborns do not receive benefits for staying home from work with infants for any period of time, Head Start has long waiting lists for the available places for needy children, some apartment complexes restrict residency to people without children, and breast feeding in public is often discouraged, despite its value for children.

Do we as a nation act in the best interests of children?

This one is from Prof. Whiting's Evolutionary Psych course blog..

I'm referring to public nudity, of course. Certainly, our country is more uptight that many of those in Europe, though less uptight than other countries. So, why is it that nudity is not allowed in mainstream media like network TV and magazines, but at the same time magazine ads are allowed to show a nude body as long as private parts are obscured?

We come into the world naked, so why are we so uptight about nudity? One major premise is that all behavior is functional, so what function does this serve for our society? What are the advantages and disadvantages of making public nudity criminal?

This one from Dr. Margand and relates to our perceptions and acceptance of nudity/sex in our American culture. On the one hand we have governmental programs that promote abstinence from sex, while on the other hand --- have you watched music videos or movies lately? No abstinence there.

So why does our society contain these mixed messages? Why is sexuality used in advertising images so often.....and what impact does it have on adolescent sexuality/beliefs/behaviors?

Some pundits/lobbyists in our culture argue that women should do bulk of the child rearing because they, presumably, are the only sex with nurturing hormones (recent evidence suggest that men possess these as well). If only women carry the nurturing instinct (as these pundits suggest), then why do these same pundits argue that men are necessary to raise a child successfully?

So given the above, why is our culture against having 2 (presumably very nurturing) lesbian women raise a child (more than 50% of the public disapprove). Is having 2 opposite sex caregivers a necessity -- interestingly in many other species females exclusively raise the young? Some would argue that a man is necessary for male role modeling (esp. for sons), but is this just perpetuating outdated sex roles if we model what may have worked for our dads 30-40 years ago? Are gender roles more important than having a loving parent(s)?