Poem 88 of 230: FROM 20TH-CENTURY SEXUALITY
From one-lover to free-lover to fee-lover,
For children’s sakes, let’s fashion back to one-lover:
In public-life there are - guess what - women and men;
Thus, upbringing’s best by a woman and a man -
Not by one or two men, or one or two women,
And not in a tug-of-war of women and men.
(C) David Franks 2003 - https://walkaboutsverse.blogspot.com
Sun 22nd Sep 2024 12:38
“Not by one or two men, or one or two women,”
According to whose / which “rules”, David?
Agree, Uilleam, of cases where a child is better off with a single-parent than in an "abusive relationship" but, overall, stand by what I've said; & we really get married/committed when we have a child.
Sat 21st Sep 2024 21:07
"For children’s sakes," David?
Tell that to the single mother of a little girl, who doesn't want to live in an abusive relationship.
If you wish to post a comment you must login.
This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
David Franks
Sun 22nd Sep 2024 20:01
When I repatriated/Blair came into power in 1997, it was illegal/against the "rules," Uilleam, for same-sex couples to adopt. Of course, we should accept same-sex relationships but children's rights MUST come first - i.e., that was one example of a change in policy for the worse.