Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
Puppies dead
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Copabanana" data-source="post: 709269" data-attributes="member: 18958"><p>Well, a dad, I think human mothers do this too, the majority of them. The only difference is that in human society I think we have THE IDEAL that we should protect our young. They say there is a biological impulse to protect your young, in human mothers. But it really does vary I think from person to person.</p><p></p><p>I think that is what brings so many mothers here to CD. Those of us here seem to be unable without effort to overcome the compulsion to protect, ADULT MEN AND WOMEN who are willfully or otherwise failing to thrive. Here we learn.</p><p>a dad. Forgive me for hijacking just a tiny bit your thread. (I still want to know about your 2 male dogs who were not getting along.)</p><p></p><p>Lil. A question. Do you think this new iteration with son and your relationship, where he is removed completely from your orbit, independent and self-sufficient to whatever extent he can manage or chooses to--and you guys uninvolved with telling him/coaching him/pressuring him/helping him/guiding him/enforcing anything--with no deadlines or consequences, *you get the drift--is it BETTER for him? (Not that you do not matter. But my question is about him.)</p><p></p><p>Not to say that you did all those things. But I do, unfortunately, when my son is near me.</p><p></p><p>I want to know if you believe him about trying to find a job, a place--if you believe that your distance, itself--is helpful...and that alone his own desire to survive and thrive to the extent he has it, will better kick in?</p><p></p><p>I know that OUR WELFARE must kick in here somewhere, that the costs to us, and how much better your lives are is paramount. But I am asking you now that you have the perspective of the past number of months, what you are thinking about a non-interventionist vs interventionist policy?</p><p></p><p>Thank you a dad. This is sort of related to mothers letting go their babies. Your thread.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Copabanana, post: 709269, member: 18958"] Well, a dad, I think human mothers do this too, the majority of them. The only difference is that in human society I think we have THE IDEAL that we should protect our young. They say there is a biological impulse to protect your young, in human mothers. But it really does vary I think from person to person. I think that is what brings so many mothers here to CD. Those of us here seem to be unable without effort to overcome the compulsion to protect, ADULT MEN AND WOMEN who are willfully or otherwise failing to thrive. Here we learn. a dad. Forgive me for hijacking just a tiny bit your thread. (I still want to know about your 2 male dogs who were not getting along.) Lil. A question. Do you think this new iteration with son and your relationship, where he is removed completely from your orbit, independent and self-sufficient to whatever extent he can manage or chooses to--and you guys uninvolved with telling him/coaching him/pressuring him/helping him/guiding him/enforcing anything--with no deadlines or consequences, *you get the drift--is it BETTER for him? (Not that you do not matter. But my question is about him.) Not to say that you did all those things. But I do, unfortunately, when my son is near me. I want to know if you believe him about trying to find a job, a place--if you believe that your distance, itself--is helpful...and that alone his own desire to survive and thrive to the extent he has it, will better kick in? I know that OUR WELFARE must kick in here somewhere, that the costs to us, and how much better your lives are is paramount. But I am asking you now that you have the perspective of the past number of months, what you are thinking about a non-interventionist vs interventionist policy? Thank you a dad. This is sort of related to mothers letting go their babies. Your thread. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
Puppies dead
Top