Thursday, August 30, 2012

Thursday, August 30, 2012- Period 1

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/opinion/men-who-needs-them.html
1. Read the article.  Consider the author's tone and your personal reaction.
2. Please add an intelligent comment (minimum 3 sentences) in response to the linked article from the NY Times.  Be sure to reference specifics from the article.
3. Comment on a classmates post in a second post (minimum 3 sentences)
*Use only your first name, last initial and period of class to identify yourself.

19 comments:

  1. This article was written in a rather argumentative tone. While it included facts such as, “Your life as an egg actually started in your mother’s developing ovary, before she was born,” they are written in such a way that implies they are the only relevant facts, and are more opinion-based facts than anything else. There are two parts required to create life, and the egg is only half of that. This article minimalizes the need for sperm and males in general to prove a point, but in a way that sounds like they're debating.
    -Amy B. Period 1

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with your thoughts on this article. It does talk about many opinions that author has about men not being necessary for the reproduction of babies. I also agree that is sounds like they're debating because he isn't bashing on men who are fathers, but is also saying they aren't needed. He is trying to prove a point of men not being needed by saying women don't need to have a man in their life to have children.

      Jessica B. Period 1

      Delete
  2. I believe that this article is slightly biased towards men, but not enough for him to be upset about it. Any man in existence can agree he is not a big part of a child’s life, besides the conceiving part, unless he chooses to be. As the article states, the male contributes “an infinitesimally small packet of DNA, less than one-millionth of your mass,” as opposed to the 6-8 pounds that the mother contributes, which shows how inferior the men are to the women. I think that this article is persuasive in making someone realize that almost everything in the conception and birth is because of the woman, but I don’t believe that this article is trying to tell people that men are useless in any child’s life. Even with new self-impregnating technology with a “straw or turkey baster,” I’m positive that any woman can agree that living with a man in a healthy relationship while having a child can be very beneficial to any child for his or her love and support.
    -Lizzy B. Period 1

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lizzy I agree with you in that he is biased towards men. howver, I disagree that any man in existance is not a big part of a childs life. To young boys, men serve as a father figure thats usually tough and an example for their children. Women can choose to not be part of their childs life after birth also. They have the option to put the child up for adoption or they may even have to work and leave the child behind with someone who watches them. However, you prove a very good point!

      Anna A. Per. 1

      Delete
  3. I think that this article has a lot of persuasive details, but doesn’t really seem realistic. The author says, “women are both necessary and sufficient for reproduction, and men are neither.” That may be true but I still think that it’s better to have a father in a child’s life if he can be. It also says has fathers are a great to have but they are not needed. Whether they are need or not for the reproduction of babies they still are wanted by the wives and their children. It talks about that women are healthier and far less likely to commit a crime, but that doesn’t mean to say we don’t need men. Yes, technically men are not needed for the reproduction but, it’s a harsh decision to say that no one needs them.

    Jessica B. Period 1

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree with this article that men are not physically needed for survival. Although women need sperm in order to undergo the reproduction process it is said that you do not need a man to get sperm. The article states, “He unwittingly demonstrated that the female component of sexual reproduction, the egg cell, cannot be manufactured, but the male can.” We can in fact live without men but men without women would be sure extinction. Also, the mother contributes much more to their baby then a father ever could. The article says, “If your mother breast-fed you, as our species has done for nearly our entire existence, then you suckled from her all your water, protein, sugar, fats and even immune protection.” The milk that the mother gives her child helps to keep it healthy, while the father could do nothing but love the baby. Although women might love having the comfort of men, they are not needed for survival.

    Morgan R. Per-1

    ReplyDelete
  5. The author of this article makes a valid point, but his views are solely based on a biological/reproductive point of view. Although it is true that “If a woman wants to have a baby without a man, she just needs to secure sperm” I believe that is not the only necessary aspect into nurturing and growth of an infant. It’s completely ridiculous to say that men play no part into the growth of the child. Who’s to say that a woman is going to be a good parent to their child even if they have the essentials to care for a child? When growing up, I believe the love and support of the father is extremely important for the child to grow up healthy and more importantly happy.

    Cory W. P-1

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with what you're saying. This article is only focusing on the biological point of view. A child not only needs the proper nutrients, but also needs love and care. In most cases, both, the mother and provide the child with this. I believe that a child does best with the love of both, a mother and father. And, if they are raised well and kept in a happy environment, then the child will most likely grow up to be happy and therefore healthy.

      Ayeshra A. P-1

      Delete
    2. The obvious problem with your argument is that it ignores the multitude of successful single parents and homosexual families in its conclusion that a child preforms best with one parent of each gender.

      Delete
    3. Though it may seemed like it, I wasn't trying to imply that a child can be raised well with only a female and male parent. Yes, there are many successful single parents and homosexual families. But, I spoke in terms of a father and mother simply because this is what the article focuses on, a female parent and a male parent.

      Ayeshra A. P-1

      Delete
  6. Though this article brings up a good point, it’s only focusing on the biological aspect. Women may contribute a whole lot more than men in terms of reproduction. But, it’s not fair to say that men aren’t needed. This article mentions how children “steal” minerals from their mother’s bones and oxygen, yet the fathers only contribute “3.3 picograms of DNA” to their children. This is something beyond our control. It’s not like we have the power to control how much they contribute to their child. Raising a child is much more than just who gives the most nutrients/DNA to their child. It’s about the love and care that both, the mother and father provide to their children. A child is raised best with both, the love of a mother and father. Also, there is no guarantee that a mother will always love and care for her child. Similarly, there is no guarantee that a father will be absent when he should be raising his child. The idea of the world surviving on just women with frozen sperm is a bit absurd. Therefore, this article does bring up some very interesting points, especially coming from a man, but it is biased and not realistic.
    The tone of the article is somewhat critical because the author brings up many points and criticizes them. Also, the author is being somewhat stereotypical when he says things such as "From the production of the first cell... fathers can be absent. They can be at work, at home, in prison or at war, living or dead." He talks as if most men are absent while they should be caring for their children. This may be true in some cases, but certainly not all.

    Ayeshra A. P-1

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with your thoughts on this for the most part. The way the article is phrased makes it seem very biased, and also contradictory. The author keeps talking about how men aren't necessary, but then goes on to say that they realize there are some good fathers out there. Also, you stated that we don't have the power to control how much they contribute to raising their child, which is true. However, they certainly do have the power to control that, and a lot of males do have an active role in raising their children. As you said, not all fathers are absent from their child's life.
      -Amy B. Period 1

      Delete
    2. I agree with Amy's thoughts on the article being contradictory due to the fact that the author keeps stating that men are not needed during the creation, but some father's are excellent. The author also contradicts himself when he's dismissing father's as a necessity, yet mentions, "I credit my own father as the more influential parent in my life."


      Francesca L.
      Period 1

      Delete
  7. I believe this article is written in an argumentative and slightly judgmental tone. When the author says, "Women are necessary and sufficient for reproduction, and men are neither," it's implying that men are not needed to create a child, nor needed to be a part of a child's life. I believe that regardless if a man is necessary to create offspring or not, it is still extremely important to take an active part in their child's life. The author is being judgmental because he is noting that most men do not make the effort to be a father, so with that, they are "useless," for the creation of a child.

    - Francesca L.
    -Period 1

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Francesca, I agree that this is an argumentative and judgmental tone, and although I can see where you get your point from, I do not think that he thinks that a father is useless. Even though he is stating that men are not necessities in a child life, he is not saying that most men do not make the effort to be a father. I do believe that we all interpret articles in different ways though, and you do have a very valid point considering the author's tone!

      -Lizzy B. Period 1

      Delete
  8. While the argument that females are far more important to human reproduction is technically correct, the author severely under-values genetic contribution in favor of mass. His detached tone seems also to ignore the value of variety and jokingly implies that males' entertainment value is the genders' only lasting one. Many of his points on female superiority are irrelevant, especially the assertion that longevity is a value in this overpopulated world.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think the authors tone is challenging and informative. When he says, “That bias, however, is becoming harder to sustain, as men become less relevant to both reproduction and parenting.” he is implying that men are not needed in the process of reproduction at all. However, they are indeed, but what they give to make the baby can be preserved and used at any time in the future. Also men are relevant in parenting. In many cases men take just as much care of their children as women do. He supports his article with facts such as, “In contrast, your father’s 3.3 picograms of DNA comes out to less than one pound of male contribution since the beginning of Homo sapiens 107 billion babies ago.” The author did an excellent job of cleverly informing people of this topic with information in my opinion.

    Anna A Per. 1

    ReplyDelete
  10. I felt that this article was audacious, in the sense that the author makes it seem women can survive solely without men. This is false; men have contributed to all the technology we have today, without them women wouldn’t have the technology to survive on human cloning. I felt that this author was bias and didn’t make it a point to point out the key factors of what men do contribute to in this day’s and past day’s society. In paragraph 15 the author states, “Meanwhile women live longer, are healthier and are far less likely to commit a violent offense.” This point is irrelevant to the discussion. The author failed to include that men tend to have more jobs in the industrial area. This concludes the shorter life span and health of women to men.


    Jesse C. Per. 1

    ReplyDelete
  11. This article came off as a bit harsh when I read it. I felt that it was harsh because the author was literally bashing men saying that they are only a tiny part of a newborn’s growth and that there is nothing they can do to support the child. I thought this especially when I read, “They did not merge with you, or give you any cell membranes or nutrients — just an infinitesimally small packet of DNA, less than one-millionth of your mass.” I thought this was especially harsh. I know it is the truth, and the truth is harsh, but men do supply things for the child that isn’t stated in this article. One example is if the mother’s stressed, or not properly getting prenatal care, the men can help with that. They can be emotional support, get their wife/girlfriend (or whoever it may be to them) to a doctor to properly care for the baby, and they can help the mother with whatever they may need help with in preparing for the newborn that the mother simply cannot do. While the article is true about how a man is not desperately needed to create a child, but men do help when raising the child and in some ways may be needed to help the mother.

    Rachel I. Per. 1

    ReplyDelete