TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead
    • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

"the paternal function is essentially the interruption of an exclusive mother-child bond" So pretty much, fathers are just a nuisance.

CWBECK

May 25, 2016
14 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://imgur.com/ZeBg9FG
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title "the paternal function is essentially the interruption of an exclusive mother-child bond" So pretty much, fathers are just a nuisance.
Author

CWBECK

Upvotes 14
Comments 28
Date May 25, 2016 12:57 AM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/4kx4a3/the_paternal_function_is_essentially_the/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/the-paternal-function-is-essentially-the.948889
https://theredarchive.com/post/948889
Top posts by CWBECK

Thanks, UN.

4923 upvotes
March 8, 2017
/r/MensRights

"Men are whimps", says Daily Show on male birth control side effects

1095 upvotes
November 10, 2016
/r/MensRights

Huh. Never exactly expected such a popular Youtuber to have such openly controversial opinions.

900 upvotes
January 30, 2017
/r/MensRights

Look at what you've done, Bernie.

596 upvotes
May 8, 2016
/r/MensRights

Anyone notice how if a biological aspect is found in women that advantages them more then men it's an automatic sign of their superiority but if men are found with a biological advantage then it "must" be socially constructed?

388 upvotes
June 25, 2016
/r/MensRights

Wikipedia's "Father" article makes men look bitter and jealous; frustrated that "only women" are able to contribute to the creation of life.

279 upvotes
May 20, 2016
/r/MensRights

Study finds that as many as 88% of people would rather throw a man off a bridge than a woman.

194 upvotes
July 16, 2016
/r/MensRights

I'm kind of amazed that someone would write about how MRA's are whiny crybabies and than proceed to disable their comments because people were disagreeing with her.

189 upvotes
November 23, 2016
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]HeForeverBleeds 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Fuck that "mothers are inherently better" bullshit, my father was more loving and nurturing to me than my mother ever was. I really hate this idiotic treatment of motherhood as if it's some sacred thing. It's this kind of nonsense that contributes to the harmful assumption that mother's are always the best people for the child and why there are too many cases of abusive mother's getting custody over the fathers that are in some cases the healthier option

[–]CWBECK[S] 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Same article mentions the fact that a lot of Danish single moms who choose to become moms through sperm donations are doing just fine is "reassuring."

To be honest if it weren't for Danish women getting almost 3k a month in welfare it probably wouldn't be as much. Said moms even realize that it's hard work and some still date in hopes of getting their kids a dad.

[–]Arby01 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

That's a possibly strange conclusion.

It says that the "interruption of the mother-child bond is necessary for the development of a mature mind".

You are interpreting the use of the word "interruption" in a different context from how it is used. If anything this statement is that fathers are essentially to the child development and the lack of a father means that there are unhealthy mother-child bonds that delay and damage healthy development.

[–]CWBECK[S] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

How are you reading it in that way? It literally states that any sort of male role model, regardless of fatherhood, is a nuisance to the bond between a mom and child. You seem to be twisting the sentence around.

[–]Arby01 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

is a nuisance to the bond between a mom and child.

The article never refers to it as a nuisance. You are interpreting meaning emotionally from the word choice used. Probably you have some attached meaning to 'interruption' that isn't relevant to the discussion.

[–]CWBECK[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It makes it seem like mothers are required or else the baby will grow up to be absolutely dysfunctional or something. It seems to just shrug fathers off.

[–]Arby01 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, it might say that - but the bit that you posted says exactly the opposite - it says that without the interruption to the mother-child bond the child will not develop a 'mature mind'. That's saying without the male parental role the child will be dysfunctional.

[–]CWBECK[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I thought it was saying that the mother child bond was necessary.

[–]Arby01 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I read it more as the mother-child bond was assumed to exist (which sort of makes sense) and that without interruption the child would develop unhealthily.

The paper you linked seems to hold the Oedipal issue as the context for this - in that vein any adult sexual partner of the mother would do but the paper doesn't actually say that. It may imply it but that would require a deeper read than I have done. I would have to spend a great deal of time analyzing that paper and even if I did, I don't have the background necessary for a legitimate criticism of the arguments it makes.

[–]chavelah 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

Well, it says that male parental figures are essential for the proper development of our young, without speculating on whether a genetic relationship between the child and the male role models is necessary. Which probably makes sense in the context of hunter-gatherer societies, because who the fuck knew who the biological father was?

[–]Arby01 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

OK. I agree your statement is accurate. What distinction are you trying to draw though?

[–]CWBECK[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link

I assumed his point was that male role models in general are interrupting some sort of sacred bond between a mother and her child.

Isn't he essentially saying that any sort of divergent path from traditional gender roles is wrong because apparently women are more "in-tune" with the children that they give birth to?

He literally states later that in other societies gender doesn't matter due to both men and women nurturing and caring for their young in the essay. He contradicts himself.

[–]Arby01 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

sacred bond

again, you are choosing to characterize the article emotionally. The article said nothing about the mother-child bond being any more important than any other bond, simply that it exists and the male parental bond serves to interrupt it. Think of it more like a chemical interaction or something. Piece b comes from piece a, piece c serves to help piece b separate from piece a. It's just a discussion of one mechanic of the interaction.

There may be more to the article that causes you to interpret this paragraph this way, but the paragraph by itself doesn't hold the meanings you are applying - nuisance, sacred bond, etc - you are reading that into the paragraph.

[–]CWBECK[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

I have a link to the article if you want it.

[–]Arby01 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

sure

[–]CWBECK[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

http://www.sebastiankraemer.com/docs/Kraemer%20No%20such%20thing%20as%20a%20father%20(2nd%20edition).pdf

[–]Arby01 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

wow. that's long and dense.

So, the opening language in the first couple of pages very much has the tone that father's aren't relevant, I can see how you might get that reaction - however, the later pages seem to not support that initial reaction.

That being said, that's a very dense read with a lot of referenced concepts and after about page 3 my eyes started to blur as it's less exciting than reading the dictionary. I skimmed the remainder.

I don't think the article supports the narrative but the initial opening page or two certainly make it seem like it might.

I think a lot of it is focused on the effect of broken families (ie divorce) on child development and behaviour. So, it separates out the 'effect of a male parent'.

[–]CWBECK[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

He has an entire section on fragile males and his first ever work about fathers was how fathers were born as an envious attack on motherhood.

[–]Arby011 point 10 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The first couple of pages definitely have an anti-father tone. It just doesn't seem to be overtly supported in the rest of the document.

[–]CWBECK1 point 10 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I just hate this logic that mother child relationships are absolutely necessary even if said mother is a terrible person, which from the sound of it is sort of what he's implying.

[–]Arby012 points 10 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well the author may hold that they are necessary, the article just sort of assumed they existed without making any real claim as to good or bad. I think you could say the article assumed that they existed and were expected to be good, but i think that's a fair generalization. The bad examples are likely a lower percentage than the good.

[–]CWBECK1 point 10 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Just some of the stuff he implies his odd, like when he says that sons shouldn't really take their fathers advice in growing beards or that fatherhood in general is a social construct. I don't know.

[–]CWBECK[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If you read it get back to me. I'd like to see what you have to say about it.

[–]chavelah -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Just that there wasn't an argument being made here for the necessity of "fathers" as we have come to define the term (i.e., the guy who provided the other half of the kid's DNA), nor for the necessity of fathers having any actual right to assume the parental role. So I don't think it's a particularly relevant argument from a men's rights perspective, since we're focused (correctly IMO) on men being able to know who their biological offspring are and being able to have contact with them that isn't regulated by the mother.

[–]Arby01 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

(i.e., the guy who provided the other half of the kid's DNA)

True.

nor for the necessity of fathers having any actual right to assume the parental role.

If you mean the article doesn't state that the biological father has a right to this role - you are correct.

However, I don't think that this chunk is really talking about fathers (or mothers) much at all, it's simply saying that the mother-child bond needs to be limited for the child to be healthy and the male parental role serves the function of limiting the mother-child bond.

I would read it more as a discussion of a proposed mechanism of child development than as any sort of comment on the mother or father.

In fact, having written that, I believe that is exactly what this chunk is, it's an excerpt from some text on child development and is discussing psychological development of the child. It's not making any sort of value statement about mothers, fathers, parenting, biology or anything else.

It should be viewed as a dry proposal of what someone believes the psychological mechanism is that creates mentally healthy children.

[–]CWBECK[S] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sorry, I'm just a little peed about fathers maybe getting so much shit and possibly being told that they're just a nuisance.

[–]CWBECK[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

But fathers SHOULD be able to have the right to be a parent and to nurture and care for their kids. The inclusion of fathers isn't going to interrupt the mother-child bond, just like how ANY SOCIAL interaction isn't going to; you can have more then one kind of social bond with more then one person.

That's my point, people have this idea that mothers and ONLY mothers are able to raise a child, and that Dads are just the third wheel who doesn't know how to do anything. There are tons of single dad homes out there where the kid is doing fine, so don't even give me this shit about the "necessity" of the bond between moms and kids, because data shows that father-child bonds are pretty damn necessary too.

[–]Arby01 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But fathers SHOULD be able to have the right to be a parent and to nurture and care for their kids.

Maybe the context around the piece that you posted indicates that the writer is using the piece to advance that view. The part you posted itself I don't believe supports that view. It might be being taken out of context and misinterpreted to support idiocy, but that isn't the fault of the text.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter