One of the popular beliefs in this corner of the net is that a strong, masculine father can prevent just about every poor outcome for his children.
Kid is a brat? Must be a weak, beta father.
Kid is gay? Must’ve lacked a masculine influence in his life.
Kid is an alcoholic? Dad didn’t lay down the rules.
I understand the sentiment to these types of statements, but as a father of three children approaching their pre-teen years I am finding that I can only partially agree with them now.
I have 27 “years” of parenting under my belt if you add up the age of my children. I can say, with authority, that we are fighting forces that go far beyond the loss of masculine fathers.
I’d love to tell you that everything will be fine if you are a “strong, masculine” father, but that would be false. Sure, there are many ills that can be prevented by a father properly filling his role as leader and protector.
However, outside forces are at work that are beyond our understanding, and well beyond our control.
Some of the most masculine fathers I know have gay children. How can this be? I thought masculine fathers prevented that? I wish I could say it’s true.
There may be some correlation between weak fathers and gay sons, but I suspect any causation is genetic or environmental, and a change of psychological frame will do little to stem such an outcome.
The same environmental or cultural forces that have weakened fathers have had another generation of time to further weaken their children.
I believe the role of parents is like the role of sugar in type II diabetes. Those who get diabetes have a genetic predisposition to it, but it is triggered by a lifetime consumption of sugar.
There are many things a parent can do to avoid poor outcomes for their children in many different areas. I believe helping children learn to find their own fulfillment is essential and can ward off diseases like anxiety and depression.
My children will always be genetically prone to those psychological diseases, but as a diabetic can prevent diabetes by avoiding sugar, I can teach my children to nurture themselves without self-loathing.
But I also suspect there are other conditions, just like type I diabetes, that can’t be prevented. Or if they can be prevented, we simply don’t understand the mechanisms to do so, and we know they fall beyond our immediate control at the moment.
I suspect this is where we are at with homosexuality. I’m not talking about degenerate bisexuality or “experimentation”, but chemical homosexuality. I’ve met boys that exhibited deeply feminine traits nearly from birth, it was clear from an early age that they would be gay, any attempt to surmise otherwise would be futile.
This is likely the roughly 1% of our population that has always been homosexual, you know it when you see it.
As for the rest, like the soccer moms “switching teams” and leaving behind their husband and kids in their thirties for another woman? I’d like to think that stems from a loss of masculine leadership.
But perhaps the loss of masculine leadership is also linked to the same factors that are feminizing our boys and masculinizing our women? Maybe it is environmental, I suspect there may be something we find out later on that is causing this softening of men, and I find it hard to believe that it is simply cultural.
So can a father prevent his children from becoming gay? I suspect if they’re the “type I diabetes” type then it is doubtful, but if they are simply bored and lacking fulfillment and looking for it in all the wrong places, perhaps he can sway their life choices.
My hope is that future research gets deep into hormonal changes that are occurring across the Western world right now to understand this shift. We must overcome the taboo of studying gay people to understand “why” they are gay. I suspect it will unlock a great deal of knowledge about human behavior and how it is impacted by environmental factors. We mustn’t be afraid to follow that path.