HE has breakfast with his kids every morning. He helps with the evening meal, takes the little one swimming and talks the big one through their homework, bungs in a wash and then rolls up his sleeves for bathtime.
He makes the kids' packed lunches, takes them to the park, watches their school plays, takes them to their friends, changes nappies, wipes noses, mops up tears, does the school run, does the shopping, makes the supper and reads every Enid Blyton story ever written.
And he still manages to squeeze in a ten-hour day at the office to pay for the house, the car, the holidays and all the other pesky little things that kids need, like shoes and clothes and food.
Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's superdad!
Most of us know that superman doesn't exist, he's just an actor who has trouble dressing himself in the morning, but we seem unable to grasp the notion that maybe superdad doesn't exist either, he's just an ordinary fella who has trouble dressing himself in the morning.
A new survey has indicated that the time that fathers spend looking after their children has decreased in the last 40 years, flying directly in the face of the thoroughly modern image of hands-on, caring, sharing dads up to their eyebrows in nappies and feeder cups. Instead, they are actually choosing to spend more time at work, making the money they need to keep their family ticking over and the wolf from the door of their nice suburban semi.
New dads are, it seems, little more than a myth. If you are shocked by this I can only assume that you either don't have kids or are a fully paid up member of the Daily Mail supporters' club (free twinset and pearls if you sign up a friend!).
Of course new dads don't exist. If women can't have everything, neither can men. You can't be a new dad if you have a full-time job, especially in an age where nine to five working is a thing of the past and office hours begin early and end late.
Someone has to earn the money for the endless list of things modern families need, although whether we actually need quite so many PlayStations, juicers and flat screen TVs is up for debate.
And until the Government pulls its finger out and makes fairly-paid, part-time working for both parents a viable option, then at least one of them has to be in full-time employment.
In most cases, the one in question is the man. This might not meet with your approval in feminist, or even humanist, terms, but it remains a fact. Men, for the most part, are still the main breadwinners.
But what we can't expect is for them to win the bread, then make it into soldiers for the kids breakfast, pack it up in a Thomas The Tank Engine lunch box and tootle along to school with it and be on hand to sprinkle it with raisins and cinnamon for pudding.
There are not enough hours in the day for men to do all they would need to do to qualify as a new dad. I bet even David Beckham doesn't manage to do the school run with Peckham, Macbeth and Coach Trip every morning.
Employees are expected to work longer hours than ever before and, as a voracious consumer society, families need more money to fuel their ever increasing need for "stuff". This means more time at the office and less time at home.
There is no easy answer, and until scientists stop fannying around with sheep and start cloning dads there never will be. But in the meantime, let's stop berating men for not being perfect. Daddy doesn't always know best, but at least he's trying.
Updated: 10:33 Monday, December 05, 2005
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article