From my not favorite British paper, the Telegraph, a story about Stay At Home Dads (SAHDs) that has me reacting in a couple of different ways.

Quoting a government study of 6,000 British families, researchers at Bristol University are saying that boys raised by fathers while mothers are at work are "less prepared for education" when they start school.

Girls, are okay with it ... but boys?

"We find robust evidence that boys [but not girls] performed more poorly on academic assessments at entry to school when they were cared for by the father for long hours in years two and three.

"This suggests that some fathers may not provide the same degree of cognitive stimulation, when they are responsible for care, that mothers provide."

Before any moms out there start thinking it's back-patting time, you might just want to think this through as you read along, as this back-handed compliment is one that could end up biting us all on the butt.

As it goes along with suggestions that "children might suffer harmful emotional effects from a mother's absence," and adds that a working mother who suffers from stress or tiredness might be adversely affecting the "quality of mother-child interactions", it draws the following conclusion: The trend towards greater gender equality in family life, as well as in the marketplace, may have consequences for child, as well as adult, well-being.

There's no small part of the global population that will be over the moon to have this bit of ammo in their woman-bashing, keep-'em-pregnant-and-barefoot arsenal. I can hear it now:

If we let our women go out to work, our sons will be impaired! And at our own hands! Yikes! Calamity! Nip it IN THE BUD!

Considering that more than 200,000 British men stay home with their kids while stay-at-home moms dropped by almost a fourth, we're not talking miniscule numbers of kids here that may be accused of getting less than perfect parenting because it's Dad, not Mom, doing the brunt of it.

And why? "The study suggested that women may be better at being parents because they grow up anticipating that one day they would look after children."

That line sounds so much like so many racial slurs that I can almost not believe it's in black and white.

It appears to me that what is wrong with this picture has a lot less to do with women bailing on their kids ... all anticipation of possible motherhood aside ... than men coming to parenting as if it is a big surprise.

And why are dads more poorly equipped to do right by their boys than by their daughters?

"We find robust evidence that boys [but not girls] performed more poorly on academic assessments at entry to school when they were cared for by the father for long hours in years two and three.

"This suggests that some fathers may not provide the same degree of cognitive stimulation, when they are responsible for care, that mothers provide."

Is someone suggesting that SAHDs are putting their girls through cognitive paces ... perhaps by getting them to help with household chores? ... while the boys are doing the three-year-old equivalent of sprawling on the couch with a beer while watching Denver take on Dallas? Or, seeing that this is the UK, Liverpool versus Manchester United?

In a country ... and in a world, in fact ... where there are thousands of kids in foster care and worse, it seems that putting down a whole gender of parents and suggesting that raising kids really should be up to the mothers -- for the good of the children, of course -- is a backward, foolish and irresponsible move.

Or could there be something just a bit more political in this study, perhaps? Here's the last line:

"The rise in stay-at-home fathers is predicted to continue as paid paternity leave, introduced in 2003, is expected to be extended."

Hmmmmm.