>>> The guys who design the data to be collected are mostly male, or just reflecting the general male-run opinion.
>
>I don't believe you can possibly demonstrate any such gender imbalance in epidemiology or community health/research workers. Don't let that stop you, though. ;-)

Did I say I was doing some research on the matter? Just guessing and tossing ideas.

>Having kids usually go to the mother does not support the partiarchal dominance theory you are promulgating.

You think so? She's supposed to raise the kids with whatever allimony the court assigns, and he's supposed to go on with his carreer. What are his/her chances of finding a better job now?

>In living memory we had things called "world wars" in which males went away en masse to be shot while mothers stayed home to look after the kids. As far as I know, this did not lead to a collapse of male-female communication or any of the other consequences you say will "surely" follow.

Good. So these kids from unmixed marriages won't have such an awfully bad start after all. They would probably be better off emotionally, OTOH, than kids from calculated marriages, or those which were arranged by parents a decade in advance, or those which were forced upon a couple because of an accidental pregnancy. These kids would have beter chances of having parents who actually want them.

>Anyway, since when is "surely" a valid argument?

It's not. I was compiling a list of downsides these kids may experience. But then, there may be upsides as well. Who knows. But pretty soon I think our kids, or grandchildren, may be having friends among them. We better start thinking of making all their lives easier. So I was just pondering about what would we actually have to think of.

> That seems like something you would complain about hearing from one of the stereotype "Christians" you like to portray. ;-)

May I suggest word "monotype"? ;)