For part of my life I grew up in a single parent home and I must say this is an argument that I constantly heard my Mother and other female relatives engage. They always had to defend bringing up their sons without the presence of a father.   
The first thing that came to mind when I read this reasoning was- what are the characteristics that defines a man?  Do these characteristics include society’s notion of teaching  him(the boy child) to not cry or to not express his feeling because such traits are for girls and that these are signs of weaknesses or does it include teaching him to be insensitive to women- to maintain the patriarchal order and gender biases geared towards women?

I’m not dismissing the fact that a male figure is essential  in the up-bringing of a boy child or for that matter – a girl child, but that should not necessarily be limited to a biological father or a step- father. I have always believed in the idiom “it takes a village to raise a child” because based on my experiences, parents cannot provide everything for their children (I’m not speaking in terms of finances but in terms of social up bringing). As such, an uncle, grandfather, older brother, male teacher, et cetera, can have a positive influence on a boy child.

Hi Blue, what do you define as a man? I think that is important in the question, do you mean in how low his voice can go and his intonation, the way he walks, machismo, being attracted to girls etc? Or are you speaking of values, one’s moral compass, integrity, one’s perspective on issues of race or gender? If it’s the second, then I agree with fierytrini, her response captures that a person’s development is in ways beyond gender, but at the same time a lot of what we really should be learning about ourselves, females are the ones best capable of teaching.

So yes, I also think that males aren’t ‘needed’ to raise boy children. I think there is an actual panic at the idea of mothers, aunts and sisters raising boy children due a lot to ideas of males becoming effeminate or not being macho. There is never a discussion or urgency to talk about the impact of males bringing up females, probably because statistically and historically the reverse has been more likely but also because there are stigmas attached to being a female. But personally growing up in a household with 5 male biological family members -my two brothers, my father and two uncles (one was a mechanic and based at home), I do recall my great-aunts often chided me for being tomboyish. Too often I was scolded to ‘go inside!’, after being caught climbing the wall for mango or the roof for tamarind. Or I was told to stop whistling because that is not for girls. But tomboyish females are merely frowned upon, thought to be stubborn, and easily converted if some arrogant male comes along to ‘charm’ her.

However, for males statements such as ‘stop being a girl’, ‘he’s a real panty man’ or ‘you’re a real pussy’, are all sexist and re-enforce attitudes and stereotypes of females being weak and without male body parts that confer strength and authority. Unlike taunts made to ‘boyish’ girls, taunts made to ‘girlish’ boys are threats and attacks that carry more danger.  

And as fierytrini pointed out, because so much of history, including Caribbean history has taken place with female single parent households, for me to an extent, it should be a silly argument or question to begin with. Indeed, a lot of families where there are male heads, for the great part of their life, the mother is far more directly involved in taking on the responsibility of raising all the children.  

Homosexual couples raising children is also useful to this discussion. It is not quite the same, as persons take issue with sexuality here beyond physical expression but also the transference of the ideas of physical sexual attraction to children in that environment. However, an argument against homosexuals adopting children is also related to the ability of a single gendered family to raise a child. Humans are capable of switching gender roles as males could be nurturers and females, when they choose to could be stern depending on the circumstances and on what a situation demands.

Aside from the physical raw power of a male (which too is variable and quite psychological), females are very capable of being authoritative, dominant or commanding. That’s where female authority could differ from male abuse. Persons often confuse and equate authority and effective instruction with abuse and oppression. I think generally parents can be abusive to their children in attempts to reinforce biases, and in practicing discrimination (such as gender, colorism and size discrimination) in a family setting. Therefore a part of the idea of needing males is only for them to be feared, to stamp in ideas of control or authority by using brute force – thereby being oppressive and abusive rather than instructive, enlightening or nurturing.

I agree, with what Louise said, it takes a village to raise a child. Whatever the child doesn’t get from his mother, he picks up from society in general. Ideas that a male should be ‘very macho’, are repressive to his overall psychological development and only serve to perpetuate the idea that gender is binary, you are male and therefore able to do or should only be interested in doing u, v and w and conversely you are female, able to do or only interested in doing x, y and z.