The Psychology of Mothering

#111 hamidm: gul rehman is irrational because he is worried about his next meal. what is your excuse?

Re: # 113

tahmed,

... what is my excuse ? ...... i just happen to understand how a hungry man thinks

Re: # 105

anil mian,

"Gul Rehman's math may be right, but very short sighted. His economics of getting out of poverty is completely wrong."

........ like i said before, i don't necessarily agree with gul rehman's economic theory, but i am not a pompous ass who will stand there and argue with a man who is one meal away from starvation .......

#115 hamidm: Advising a starving man to stop creating more mouths to feed is being a "pompous ass"? Why dont you inquire from Dr Sohail the long-term affects on the brain of drinking?

Re: # 115
Your last post leads one to believe that you are an epitome of a condecending pompous ass.

Re: # 99

Gul Rehman with having 5 daughters and still poor!

This reminds me of a recent episode in my neighbourhood. It so happened that 5 cycles had been stolen in a week in our street when the theif, a young Pathan boy was caught red-handed. He was given a good thrashing and then handed over to the police. Our front-door neighbour, a professor, whose son's cycle was stolen pursued the case with the police and told me the proceedings of the case. He told me that the police took the theif to his house where he had stated the stolen cycles were lying. There the police saw some young beautiful sisters of the thief. The professor said that he was surprised when the police advised the thief as to why he did not use his young beautiful sisters to become rich instead of stealing cycles as a petty thief. So bearing of daughters is in fact a good investment in some sections of pathans and kabulies who sell their daughters.

Re: # 109
dear hamid m 2...if you would like to have serious answer then i believe mothering is a natural instinctive response of nurturing but father's response is not. many anthropologists told us that there was a time human beings did not know that having a baby was related to the sexual act that took place nine months ago. even now in many african tribes young women and men sleep with many and some women have babies, nobody knows who the father is. nobody actually cares. freud was criticized by sociologists that oedipus complex was a european concept of a nuclear family. in many cultures maternal uncle is responsible of child not the father. even in punjabi there is a saying...mama lagna ain...so fatherhood is a social not a biological concept. in the book Spermwars the writer proves that 1 in 7 grandmothers lied. so 15 % of people do not have the fathers they believe are the fathers. can you imagine doing tests in any country and finding out that 15% of children have been living a lie. i have two patients who told me that their children do not know who the real father is. they do not know the truth. i hope i answered your question...all the best...sohail

Re: # 119

Khalid sahib:

Don't you think that it is an unbalanced example?

I am certain, if custody of the child is confused among mothers, and father is not changed, fathering will come out too. I thought you did eluded to some examples of uncaring mothers. This scenario that I painted, and Hamidm sahib's examples show that there is incomplete understanding of fathering. I am certain you must have felt those pangs also.

Re: # 119

dr sohail sahib,

..... it is good to know that inner city african american men are doing what comes naturally ....... based on your and teshah's expert opinion i will make sure i change my unnatural behavior and stop paying attention to my offspring's nourishment and other needs ....... it will save me a lot of time and money that i can spend at my favourite bar ........ it is also good to know that there is at least a fifteeen percent chance that my father was not my father - this way i don't have to feel guilty about not remembering his birthday and death anniversary ......

....... you forgot to mention that the african and polynesian tribes you talk about also run around half naked and have to chase their dinner ........ i would like to think that men in more civilized cultures think and act a little differently ..... but if you say that there is no such thing as 'fathering' i will accept your professional opinion even though my gut tells me you are wrong .....

Re: # 100

What I was thinking of, was to have a girl child instead. And Sohails reply only proved my point!

Sigh...does nt matter what we do, as long as we respect the girls, I guess. Right? ;-)

they believed that mothering was the most loving role a woman can perform in her life. Some of them considered it holy and sacred. Their traditional,conservative and religious families had told them that paradise existed under the feet of mothers.

Dr sahib with due respect I would say that, it was your prospective, observation or understanding. your paradigms. It is not only their belief but a universal one! I would rephrase that it is not told so but taught so, by their Prophet SAW, (not by their families) who was not so consevative even from a none Muslim point of view. it is embeded chip, well planted seed by nature!

Re: # 121; hamidm sahib,

I think I'd agree with you rather than Dr Sohail on this one. I noticed, as a father of a seven year old, the connection is far stronger than what could just be explained by 'instinct or the lack of it' as Dr Sohail is trying to present.

This could also be applied to the odd story of 'mixed up babies' at birth with the child ending up being brought up by 'non-biological' parents, unknowingly; where is the 'maternal instict' there? Or does the 'leaky boob story' (someone mentioned before) still hold true?

What we do now a days is far more a result of our upbringing and the social structure we live in than simple instinct. It is 'non-conscious' animals that live with instinct; humans live by the rules of society and this 'instinct' business is dictated by the same.

Different rules might apply to 'primitive' cultures where 'animal instincts' are still rife and might be determining factors instead (to a variable extent).

The same holds true for people trying to criticise 'natural selection' and its apparent lack of impact on humans (by what we can determine); as humans we have learnt to 'control' nature and modify its course. In a primitive setting, all the 'bad' genes would be wiped out in the course of a handful of generations; as 'civilised' humans, we tend to keep this gene pool going due to societal/ethical pressures (its important to make it clear that I am not advocating genetic cleansing here!) by allowing all, irrespective of their usefulness (diasabilities etc), to survive and pass on their genes successfully.

I quote an example here (since polynesians are mentioned). I was working up a patient for kidney transplant (donated by her mother). She happened to be a young attractive Maori girl from New Zealand; mother was, although healthy, quite overweight. In my mind I was trying to picture this girl 'turning into her mother' in due course, so to speak. Then I looked around and saw that most polynesian women after a certain age were overweight and looking at the reason behind it discovered that it was simply 'natural selection'! Due to repeated weather dependent yearly famines, in primitive times they would have had to 'accumulate' body fat, to burn off later in times of need. Since the only (or majority) genes that survived were of 'fat' people, we have a whole race of people who are 'big-boned' so to speak. Now they won't/can't loose weight because there is no famine! This can be extrapolated to many other parts of the world quite easily.

So to attempt to apply 'instinct' to explain any human behaviour is a gross over-simplification to say the least!

#85 cheema: on the difference between the brain and mind - actually, i dont know the difference. In fact no one really knows given that neither the workings of the brain nor of the mind are fully understood.

What i do understand is this: advancements in neurology indicate that more and more of what we thought to be the "mind" is being explained by the physical workings of the brain.

cheema: the dissection i referred to is of course practiced in medical colleges in pakistan, so i am surprised you thought it was incorrect for me to point to your having performed dissections. my own cousin once got locked in a room with dissected cadavers in lahore and spent a few hours enjoying the company until finally the chowkidar came to her rescue, but that is another story...

as for muslims not donating bodies for scientific research - that has to do with social and education factors, not religion. Grave-robberies were widespread in the west until the end of the 19th centuries as a result.

Re: # 126; tahmed

I am not sure what you are implying in the last two posts. Yes I have performed dissections many a times including in the very recent past; one way to keep updated with anatomy of course.

Mind/brain was an open-ended scenario; I believe less and less in the 'mind' and more and more in the 'brain' as time goes; a lot of what was originally thought to be mind - the abstract, has been discovered/revealed in brain - the physical/biological/chemical terms over the last quarter of a century, and the process in an ongoing one; I suppose that is what science means to me as opposed to belief.

I stand by my total disdain and contempt for 'belief' as we know it; nothing new there! The former (science/knowledge) unveils new horizons to explore where the latter (faith/belief) seeks to confirm what exists and constantly gets reaffirmed by the feeble-minded. The difference to the 'seeing' eye is of a great magnitude indeed.

I leave you with your happy thoughts Tahmed bhai......just don't get too carried away....

Re: # 121

cheema sahib,

..... the problem with psychologists, sociologists and other social 'scientists' is that they all belong to one or the other school of thought which is based on a set of theories that a few 'gurus' have developed over time and which have been accepted as the gospel by a certain number of people ..... for every theory that you have out there, there are many others that are diametriclly opposite ........ in that respect, sociology and psycology are like religion ..... a fool like masadi is convinced that the us elite is behind all evil on earth, while another fool like tahmed is convinced that the moon god controls the universe without any help from his daughters .....

....... so doctor sohail might be wrong, but he is sincere in his opinion and i am sure some of his patients will respond to his psychotherapy techniques ....... others will end up in the looney bin or jump off the bridge - they would have been better off listening to a charlatan like dr deepak chopra or joining a yogananda ashram in montreal .....

........having said that, even real mind doctors (psychiatrists) are quacks as far as i am concerned - if you take way their prozac, ritalin and half a dozen other popular drugs they have nothing else to offer ......

.... as always, i have no real scientific evidence to offer but, based on personal experience i am convinced that there is a lot more to a parent-child relationship than the simple sexual fantasies proposed by an austrian pervert ...... dr. sohail is a good man, but we must take his advice with a truck load of salt or we will end up like tony soprano ..........