Would you prefer your son to be aggressive or sensitive?

Nystyle709 wrote:

Oh really? That's wonderful. And I STILL prefer rugged and aggressive.

Supernova wrote:


But why does that have to be the determining factor in if a boy is a boy or not? You make it clear he would have to be those things to be a BOY as if there's only one kind of boy in the whole world.

Nystyle709 wrote:

You read only what you want to read don't you? My statement about him being a boy doesn't knock boys who are sensitive and peaceful. That's what YOU think and what you want to think. I am quite aware that there is more that one type of "boy" in the world. However, the OP did ask a question and I answered it. Rugged and aggressive would be my preference, but it's not something that I'm hellbent on. My comment about him being a "boy" meant that whatever temperament my male child possessed , I would hope he's still a typical boy at the end of the day. Get it now?

Supernova wrote:

For the most part but what exactly IS a typical boy? This isn't the 1950s when boys had chemistry sets and dressed like cowboys and girls had baby dolls and played house. Exactly what applies to each gender role has taken a massive header out the window in the last few decades.

Chris wrote:Say you had a son between the ages of eight and eighteen; would you prefer he be more rugged and aggressive in personality, or that he be more sensitive and peaceful? If you had to choose between those two opposite extremes.

Marc wrote:Aggressive, if he was raised right during his formative years. Sensitive if he wasn't.