If youre a reader of John Rosemond's parenting columns, which run in The N&O on Tuesdays, you might expect him to be strident in person. Not so. He's actually pretty soft-spoken and subtly funny, in that two-beats-later you get the joke kind of way.
Rosemond was at The N&O this week at the invitation of Executive Editor John Drescher, who wrote a column in April (read it here) about a recent firestorm Rosemond caused when he told the mother of a girl whose boyfriend's "response to almost anything my daughter says is a cut or put-down, a dismissal of her accomplishment or mocking" that the young man was a "find." How's that? "He's not into partying, playing video- and online games, proving that he can drink more beer than his friends and still remain conscious, and dressing in oversize, ill-fitting clothes that make him look like a 6-foot toddler. From your description, he's a find! Do everything you can to keep him!" is what Rosemond said, calling the verbal denigration "one annoying habit."
That particular column made me absolutely livid, although, in general, I'm probably one of exactly three people in The N&O newsroom, given how many times I've heard the man's name used in vain there, who can say she agrees with Rosemond at least half the time. Most detractors, Rosemond said, react to him emotionally, which gets in the way of their ability to actually think.
Rosemond, whose columns appear in 200 newspapers, spent an hour talking off the cuff, or rambling as he said, and taking a few questions. He tours the country giving speeches, having spent 150 nights away from home last year. His mission? "I’m doing two things: women's liberation and marriage restoration."
He has quite a lot to say about women, in fact, or "the modern American mother," as he referenced repeatedly. Why focus on women and their parenting? The brain of "the modern American mother" has been polluted by parent babble, he said. "No man in America has come home and said, “Honey, has the new issue of Parenting magazine come yet?' ”
My notes on some of the thoughts Rosemond shared, many of which you will be familiar with if you read his column. This is NOT verbatim, by any stretch:
Today’s parents are not thinking in terms of children’s character. Parents used to have a long-range view. Our parents were trying to raise good citizens. (This was the subject of his most recent column. Read it here.)
My mother insisted I do my best and in conjunction with my teacher determined what my best was. If my best had been Cs, my mother would have been perfectly satisfied as long as I did my best.
Fifty years ago, parents did not help with homework. It was rare if they asked whether you even had homework. They expected you to be responsible. If a teacher had called my house about my behavior, my mother would have thanked her and said she’d take care of it. Teachers today are reluctant to call home. They call with great trepidation because more often than not the parent becomes defensive, becomes the child’s advocate and attorney. Teachers ask me, “What’s going on? Why can’t parents accept that children misbehave?" Parents believe parenting produces the child. Parenting is an influence in a child’s life, an influence that is high when a child is small and as the child grows that influence wanes.
My mother knew the greatest human quality is free will, a person’s own decision-making capability. My mother knew a child is capable of making decisions that have no bearing on how the parents behaved in the past. My mother knew no matter how well she parented, I was capable of leaving her and making a decision that was "depraved, degenerate and disgusting."
In the confusion of the current parent babble, the female anxiety level concerning child rearing is at an all-time high. The next day, it will be even higher. And the next day, it will be even higher. A terrible, terrible thing has happened to the American female. Today’s mother is obsessed with detail. My mother was willing to let the little details fall where they may.
Today’s mother is a micromanager, obsessed with detail, in a state of high stress and anxiety, and she drives other people crazy. Women have managed to let their authority over children slip away. They have all of this authority now in the board room, in the military, in politics etc, but they let their authority over children run through their fingers.
When a child is born, a woman backs right out of the marriage and leaves the man standing there. She gives in to peer pressure to conform to this ludicrous standard of good mothering.
I always ask audiences whether they believe children today are happier than they were 50 years ago. Nobody ever says yes. Depression in children today has increased by a factor of 5 or 10.
Funniest moment: This is the new posture of parenting (he says as he bends down, hands on knees, face at an invisible child’s eye level). “We haven’t talked in 30 minutes. Have you had a feeling in the last 30 minutes that you need to talk about?”
Before, if a woman had a parenting problem, she’d go to mom or grandma or an aunt, somebody older than her. They’ve stopped doing that. What does Grandma know? She doesn’t have a Ph.D.
Raising children has become bad for the mental health of women in America. When are women going to get it?
Mothers put the child before the husbands. Children need to see that those two people are in a relationship, that they pay more attention to each other than to me! They need a demonstration that a marriage is operating here, and that’s lacking in America today.
Men come home from work and get down in the floor and play with their children. Why? They say because the children haven’t seen them all day. Well, neither have their wives. Today’s family is more a relationship between mother and child than husband and wife. And men compensate for the relationship of the (ex)wife and children (that little ex was the joke ... see? subtle!) by accepting the new ideal to be a child’s best buddy.
So the American child today is being raised by a micromanager and a buddy. What they need is leadership. Somebody with complete confidence in his or her authority has a calm leadership. Parents today have no authority.
Parents need to teach children manners before academics. They need to be told what their obligations are to other people. Today, it’s all about the obligation to the child. A child needs an education built on a solid foundation of character.
And for the record: Rosemond, who has been writing the column since the 1970s, said he’s been wrong and admitted it exactly three times.



Comments
Two nights ago when it was
Wed, 07/13/2011 - 16:30 — PM_PBOTwo nights ago when it was time to leave the pool I caught my nine-year-old son's eye across the pool deck, snapped my fingers, and beckoned him to me with one finger. He smiled, disengaged from his friends and came to our table to dry off and get ready to leave. Why? He knew that I was now enforcing the warning given a few minutes before that we were about to leave. We have a few rules in our house, but the first is "We are the parents and we are in charge." Ranging from nineteen to nine in age, all I have to do is snap my fingers and behavior changes - whatever they aren't supposed to be doing stops. Once someone told me I treated my children like dogs with the finger snapping. Well, if your dogs are loved, treasured for their individuality, expected to behave well in groups and kindly toward others - and you don't have to raise your voice or threaten to get them to do it - I'd like to meet your dogs and I bet you'd like to meet my children. All this to say that I think John Rosemond is right on track - clear expectations, consistent training, strong adult household leadership, lots of love, parents reading aloud every night, logical and consistent consequences for all sort of behavior - these things make happy and healthy children. And I work full-time outside my home, am a voting liberal Democrat, go to church regularly - and have happy children.
rosemond
Thu, 06/02/2011 - 10:29 — smoulieIn response to the rant about Rosemond- In the past two years I have helped seven children get off the drugs forced upon them by using John's methods-all are doing better in school and at home. Parents are actually enjoying their children now. One was 3 1/2 and on four drugs when I got involved. The guardians were willing to make changes and take control of the parenting. Most "ADHD" behaviors disappeared in 30 days but it took us 6 months to get him off the medications due to the reluctance of the psychiatrist. He will be exited from special education next week and begin kindergarten as a regular student in August. John's parenting ideas work because they are easy and clearly place responsibility for raising children back on parents instead of letting drug companies and the psychiatrists they support tell parents that their children can only be normal if their take the abnormal, unnatural, chemicaly manufactured and highly profitable drugs produced by the drug companies (many of these drugged children recieve their drugs courtsey of US taxpayers through Medicaid.) I am not a doctor and have never played one on tv. I am a simple MSW who has helped children and families learn to live together happily with out drugs for many years.
Thus I refute Rosemond
Mon, 05/09/2011 - 13:52 — deliadelionhttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/08/opinion/08coontz.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=When%20we%20hated%20mom&st=cse
I hope that the N&O will get around to reprinting this New York Times op-ed piece. It refutes much of Rosemond's "bygone days" drivel with reliable research.
In any case, I wonder why the N&O continues to grant a pulpit to a so-called "expert" whose political and religious biases underpin his entire approach and are supposedly confirmed by raised hands, in response to a question posed by himself, by audiences at his lectures. Rosemond counts the hands himself, of course.
Journalism is supposed to at least try to be honest, accurate, and based on verifiable evidence. But this columnist, who has boosted his dubious reputation by insisting that ADD/ADHD either doesn't exist at all or can be "cured" by depriving children of privileges and sending them to bed after dinner, proudly bases his subjective conclusions either upon the self-reporting of people who already agree with him (satisfied column readers and lecture audiences) or people with whom he already agrees (authors of books about child-rearing who share his political and religious agendas).
Rosemond's thinly veiled contempt for women who work outside the home is matched by his open contempt for women who don't approach child-rearing the way he thinks they should. How lucky he is that the editors of North Carolina's newspaper of record look away as, week after week, he blathers on about how much better women supposedly had it in those conveniently bygone days when somehow they managed to demonstrate tremendous autonomy, independence, and control while staying at home full-time AND not "hovering" over their children.
This ridiculous excuse for parenting advice has long outstayed its welcome on the pages of your newspaper. When are YOU going to "get it" and show Rosemond the door?
Rosemond
Fri, 05/20/2011 - 08:46 — MySideThe above letter writer is living in a dream world. I raised 3 lovely women who have tons of self esteen and are wonderful mothers. They were raised to be responsible for their own actions. Parents today don't ever ask their children to be responsible for their decisions. By the time these children go off to college, they are incapable of making any well thought out decisions because their parents have always done it for them....so much for self esteem! Children need to be able to exhibit self control. To do this, they have to be taught this from an early age. Whatever your method of punishment, parents need to stick to their words. If a child is given punishment, it needs to be for the entire time promised...not only a day or few hours and then the parent says "Oh, I guess you have learned your lesson". Parents, be responsible yourself and raise children who are capable of creating good and productive lives for themselves!