No, your point is only wealthy people can stay home and that those who do are lazy. The first is objectively false and the second is a shitty judgement call you have made. Parasitic women!? Wtf is that victim blaming bullshit.
You need some serious class solidarity and to stop letting wealthy people tell you who is “lazy” and who is righteous.
No, my point is that your demand that everyone be able to do it is entitled and unrealistic. And I think your insistence that almost everyone has always done it does a huge disservice to the majority of women who always had to bring in income.
‘Parasitic women’ is a term de Beauvoir made up to refer to the elite women who did not advocate for their own sex and instead adhered to classist, sexist ideals that maintained their husband’s - and by extension their own - privilege. I just referenced it so you could go look it up.
I’m not interested in your defensiveness. I never used the word lazy. Do I think it’s more important to give your children the stability of a home and consistent heating than to be able to keep them isolated in religious indoctrination (the family existing on $100k)? Yes, yes I do. As a working woman, do I resent the implication that I ought to personally be more devoted to my children while also being tapped for money to support someone else’s ideology? Yes, yes I do. As a working woman, do I want to be shoved back into economic obscurity so that it is easier for my human rights to be trampled upon? What the fuck do you think?
I made no such demand. It is not unrealistic for one parent to stay at home with the kids. Are you denying what ~11 million people do in the USA everyday? Are you also denying my own experience with my wife staying at home until my girls were old enough for school? Are you saying my wife was lazy!? This is not a good look.
You say your a mother of two, who watched your kiddos at age 1-4? My point from the very start was blaming parents who don’t have enough time and money is wrong. Society, particularly in the US, is guilty of not giving enough benefits and pay to take care of a family.
Beauvoir was a misogynistic classist at heart. While some of her work is consider important, because of her era and class the application is pretty much non-existent. You usage of her is not the silver bullet you think it is.
I am not interested in your strawmanning. I never said women should have to stay at home, please GTFO with that nonsense. Also, you definitely implied laziness and I find your denial of this unconvincing.
I am glad you have some self reflection at least. There is hope I suppose. If you stop othering people we could have a real breakthrough.
Again with the laziness. As much as demanding privilege is lazy, I guess it’s applicable? But they’re not really the same vice. Minding young children and the household is very laborious, so I don’t think staying home with young children is lazy. But I do think it’s easier to dedicate the labor of a whole parent to them vs both people bringing in income and minding them.
I am denying your assertion that the majority of women used to not work, that that is the norm for history. And because I am denying that it was ever the case, I am skeptical that it is feasible in the future.
Personally, we are fairly privileged. We are both well-compensated engineers, so we paid for private daycare. And when the daycares closed for Covid, we rotated watching the children with a couple other families from daycare so that all parents could get all their hours in.
Society, particularly in the US, is guilty of not giving enough benefits and pay to take care of a family.
Largely agree with your assessment of the problem, it’s just your assessment of the solution I disagree with… Which I thought I implied earlier. Societally there should be more options for subsidized child care, there should be modifications to the tax code and corporate regulations to achieve a more equitable distribution of wealth, and also we should give children more freedom. As a society we expect parents to keep a close eye on children at all times, and it is oppressive to both parents and children and stifles their development: both their confidence and their decision making abilities.
I never said women should have to stay at home, please GTFO with that nonsense.
Indeed you never said that. And you seemed to think, however misguidedly, that the confinnent of one parent to the home would be born just as equally by men. But history, and the current political climate, clearly show that one end of the political spectrum seeks to disempower women, and here you are making half of their argument for them.
Beauvoir was a misogynistic classist at heart.
What I’ve read so far is exactly the opposite of that, but I’m no expert on her.
If you think expecting society to help out with their future citizens as demanding privileges then there is little hope for you. I am glad you have some reason when it comes to raising children
I never asserted that the majority of women used to not work. I said that in the past a single income could easily support a family and that most families had someone who stayed home to take care of the kids. This is objectively true.
This is you strawmanning again. In fact, I recognize that house work is real work something you seemed to struggle with only recognizing work outside of the home as “real” and “worthy”.
There is so much to unpack with you from garbage puritanical work ethic to constant othering of human beings and their experiences. I am glad you recognize your privilege. The fact that you could afford to have someone else take care of your kids kind of speaks for itself. You are in a class that few people are in. Instead of lifting others up, you are making poor judgements about them.
I completely agree that children need more freedom and the expectation of constant supervision is overwhelming. Child care is abysmal in the US and making it cheaper is not the solution.
When I went to UNI I had a cohort and one of my colleagues was from an Eastern Bloc country. He came to me horrified after he looked into US daycare. He said in his country daycare had a teaching curriculum, food standards, regular inspections by the government, and was 90% subsidized. It really open my eyes to the shitshow we have in the US.
Beauvoir was a product of her class, culture, and time. You cannot use her words to understand the struggles of the poor because she didn’t experience that. She is very much pull yourself up by your bootstraps mentality which is very distasteful in my book. She was also a big fan of othering people. I don’t disagree with a lot of what she said, but it is very situational to middle/upper class France in the 20th century.
If you think expecting society to help out with their future citizens as demanding privileges then there is little hope for you.
I literally said there should be more subsidized daycare options.
You are asking for tax dollars? Forced corporate fees? to cover the cost of half of every family’s income for 4-5 years? I said THAT is privileged. And if that’s not your ask, then you should be explicit about exactly what it is you’re proposing.
I never asserted that the majority of women used to not work.
Also you:
Going back to when one income could support a family and almost everyone had a parent that was at home that they could rely on is not a stupid lie.
If “almost everyone” isn’t the same as “the majority”, then we’re done here.
You cannot use her words to understand the struggles of the poor because she didn’t experience that
This is a logical fallacy. Do you disbelieve historians because they didn’t live in the time period they speak of?
I don’t know what “othering” people is… I assume it’s similar to dehumanizing them? At no point did I do that. And I’m tired of your word soup of all the progressive buzzwords. Someone who made enough money for his wife to comfortably stop working for 5+ years has no right to lecture anyone about class solidarity. You are better off than most and still feeling sorry for yourself about the struggles of parenting and how difficult the US is. It IS difficult for many many Americans, but that ain’t you. You are closer to me than those struggling. If you were going to suggest some kind of welfare payment to people with children below a certain income, I could get on board with that. The majority of the US’s children live in poverty; we should absolutely be addressing that. But you only care about your own problems. A hand up to the already privileged, just like the push for government to wave ALL student loan repayment.
I get it, you think the baseline that other modern countries give in regards to childcare, time off, and other child related subsidies is a “privilege” too far in the US (ie: not with my tax money). I would say that except for maybe Iceland most modern countries need to do more. The US is way behind.
We were done a long time ago, you can’t twist my words into your fucked up argument no matter how hard you try. You said it was a lie, that is false.
You othered the 100k family. You are just in denial at this point. That is okay. Now you try to other me as well saying that I made all this money. We were surviving on a less than 40k a year at the time. This is the reality for most people that have kids.
Now it is my turn to other you. You are in the top 10% of households. To hear a top earner lecture me about privilege is a bridge too far. To know you payed someone poverty wages to watch your kids is pathetic. You are just another boot licking capitalist in denial.
First you balk at using “taxes” to help out crying fowl and then suggest some kind of UBI for poor people with kids. Where the fuck do you think the money would come from!? You are so confused I am surprised you know how to get out of bed in the morning.
Please spend the next year deprogramming yourself and developing real opinions. Using conservative talking points and then trying to pretend you give a fuck is mind glaringly stupid.
It is a fucking lie. Women historically worked FOR MONEY, and you still deny them credit for it to fit your agenda.
5+ years of government paid income to every single household with children is not the standard anywhere. Some European governments give ONE year. You are misrepresenting facts again. And yes, I could get behind some kind of additional welfare for children in poverty, but I don’t think it needs to be universal. My children don’t need welfare checks. Nor do any of my neighbors’ children. Nor do I really believe that yours do; your irresponsibility in representing other numbers makes me doubt the veracity of your own income claims.
The $100k family, my family members, who choose to live their ideology about a woman’s role in the family and outsource the consequences of that decision to the rest of their family/ our family without the family’s consent do excite my frustration, yes. Their repeated poor decisions about money and then expectation that they will be relieved of the consequences of those decision is extremely frustrating. But they are inherently not other. They are blood relations and part of me. Your personal judgments about me continue to be wildly off base.
Are you now going to demonize us for paying for childcare? You have no idea what we paid. We organized a harassment campaign at the first corporate daycare we went to, to get the corporation to pay the staff more and fund their certifications so they would quit leaving. Then we took our business to a non profit daycare, that charged nothing to poor families, and we paid full price, but left because they barely had any kids there. Then we went to a local chain that pays their staff some of the best rates in region.
I don’t know if you noticed, but the rest of the world is getting tired of funding the US’s mountain of debt. And you can tax me more, that’s fine. And you can certainly close all the loopholes for the assholes at the top. But when the rest of the world dumps the dollar, we won’t be able to just make up money and inflate our problems away. We’ll only be able to provide services we can actually pay for. And the amount of money you’re asking for is huge. If you say 11 million people stay home and that is a quarter of families, then your asking for income for $44 million more people for at least 5 years each. What kind of income are you looking for? $30k/yr/ person? That’s $1.3 trillion per year. And if you scoff and say that’s not what you said, it’s because you conveniently left out any specifics to your demand, so I tried to sketch out what you might mean.
No, your point is only wealthy people can stay home and that those who do are lazy. The first is objectively false and the second is a shitty judgement call you have made. Parasitic women!? Wtf is that victim blaming bullshit.
You need some serious class solidarity and to stop letting wealthy people tell you who is “lazy” and who is righteous.
https://poweratwork.us/the-myth-of-the-obsessive-american-work
No, my point is that your demand that everyone be able to do it is entitled and unrealistic. And I think your insistence that almost everyone has always done it does a huge disservice to the majority of women who always had to bring in income.
‘Parasitic women’ is a term de Beauvoir made up to refer to the elite women who did not advocate for their own sex and instead adhered to classist, sexist ideals that maintained their husband’s - and by extension their own - privilege. I just referenced it so you could go look it up.
I’m not interested in your defensiveness. I never used the word lazy. Do I think it’s more important to give your children the stability of a home and consistent heating than to be able to keep them isolated in religious indoctrination (the family existing on $100k)? Yes, yes I do. As a working woman, do I resent the implication that I ought to personally be more devoted to my children while also being tapped for money to support someone else’s ideology? Yes, yes I do. As a working woman, do I want to be shoved back into economic obscurity so that it is easier for my human rights to be trampled upon? What the fuck do you think?
I made no such demand. It is not unrealistic for one parent to stay at home with the kids. Are you denying what ~11 million people do in the USA everyday? Are you also denying my own experience with my wife staying at home until my girls were old enough for school? Are you saying my wife was lazy!? This is not a good look.
You say your a mother of two, who watched your kiddos at age 1-4? My point from the very start was blaming parents who don’t have enough time and money is wrong. Society, particularly in the US, is guilty of not giving enough benefits and pay to take care of a family.
Beauvoir was a misogynistic classist at heart. While some of her work is consider important, because of her era and class the application is pretty much non-existent. You usage of her is not the silver bullet you think it is.
I am not interested in your strawmanning. I never said women should have to stay at home, please GTFO with that nonsense. Also, you definitely implied laziness and I find your denial of this unconvincing.
I am glad you have some self reflection at least. There is hope I suppose. If you stop othering people we could have a real breakthrough.
Again with the laziness. As much as demanding privilege is lazy, I guess it’s applicable? But they’re not really the same vice. Minding young children and the household is very laborious, so I don’t think staying home with young children is lazy. But I do think it’s easier to dedicate the labor of a whole parent to them vs both people bringing in income and minding them.
I am denying your assertion that the majority of women used to not work, that that is the norm for history. And because I am denying that it was ever the case, I am skeptical that it is feasible in the future.
Personally, we are fairly privileged. We are both well-compensated engineers, so we paid for private daycare. And when the daycares closed for Covid, we rotated watching the children with a couple other families from daycare so that all parents could get all their hours in.
Largely agree with your assessment of the problem, it’s just your assessment of the solution I disagree with… Which I thought I implied earlier. Societally there should be more options for subsidized child care, there should be modifications to the tax code and corporate regulations to achieve a more equitable distribution of wealth, and also we should give children more freedom. As a society we expect parents to keep a close eye on children at all times, and it is oppressive to both parents and children and stifles their development: both their confidence and their decision making abilities.
Indeed you never said that. And you seemed to think, however misguidedly, that the confinnent of one parent to the home would be born just as equally by men. But history, and the current political climate, clearly show that one end of the political spectrum seeks to disempower women, and here you are making half of their argument for them.
What I’ve read so far is exactly the opposite of that, but I’m no expert on her.
If you think expecting society to help out with their future citizens as demanding privileges then there is little hope for you. I am glad you have some reason when it comes to raising children
I never asserted that the majority of women used to not work. I said that in the past a single income could easily support a family and that most families had someone who stayed home to take care of the kids. This is objectively true.
This is you strawmanning again. In fact, I recognize that house work is real work something you seemed to struggle with only recognizing work outside of the home as “real” and “worthy”.
There is so much to unpack with you from garbage puritanical work ethic to constant othering of human beings and their experiences. I am glad you recognize your privilege. The fact that you could afford to have someone else take care of your kids kind of speaks for itself. You are in a class that few people are in. Instead of lifting others up, you are making poor judgements about them.
I completely agree that children need more freedom and the expectation of constant supervision is overwhelming. Child care is abysmal in the US and making it cheaper is not the solution.
When I went to UNI I had a cohort and one of my colleagues was from an Eastern Bloc country. He came to me horrified after he looked into US daycare. He said in his country daycare had a teaching curriculum, food standards, regular inspections by the government, and was 90% subsidized. It really open my eyes to the shitshow we have in the US.
Beauvoir was a product of her class, culture, and time. You cannot use her words to understand the struggles of the poor because she didn’t experience that. She is very much pull yourself up by your bootstraps mentality which is very distasteful in my book. She was also a big fan of othering people. I don’t disagree with a lot of what she said, but it is very situational to middle/upper class France in the 20th century.
I literally said there should be more subsidized daycare options. You are asking for tax dollars? Forced corporate fees? to cover the cost of half of every family’s income for 4-5 years? I said THAT is privileged. And if that’s not your ask, then you should be explicit about exactly what it is you’re proposing.
Also you:
If “almost everyone” isn’t the same as “the majority”, then we’re done here.
This is a logical fallacy. Do you disbelieve historians because they didn’t live in the time period they speak of?
I don’t know what “othering” people is… I assume it’s similar to dehumanizing them? At no point did I do that. And I’m tired of your word soup of all the progressive buzzwords. Someone who made enough money for his wife to comfortably stop working for 5+ years has no right to lecture anyone about class solidarity. You are better off than most and still feeling sorry for yourself about the struggles of parenting and how difficult the US is. It IS difficult for many many Americans, but that ain’t you. You are closer to me than those struggling. If you were going to suggest some kind of welfare payment to people with children below a certain income, I could get on board with that. The majority of the US’s children live in poverty; we should absolutely be addressing that. But you only care about your own problems. A hand up to the already privileged, just like the push for government to wave ALL student loan repayment.
I get it, you think the baseline that other modern countries give in regards to childcare, time off, and other child related subsidies is a “privilege” too far in the US (ie: not with my tax money). I would say that except for maybe Iceland most modern countries need to do more. The US is way behind.
We were done a long time ago, you can’t twist my words into your fucked up argument no matter how hard you try. You said it was a lie, that is false.
You othered the 100k family. You are just in denial at this point. That is okay. Now you try to other me as well saying that I made all this money. We were surviving on a less than 40k a year at the time. This is the reality for most people that have kids.
Now it is my turn to other you. You are in the top 10% of households. To hear a top earner lecture me about privilege is a bridge too far. To know you payed someone poverty wages to watch your kids is pathetic. You are just another boot licking capitalist in denial.
First you balk at using “taxes” to help out crying fowl and then suggest some kind of UBI for poor people with kids. Where the fuck do you think the money would come from!? You are so confused I am surprised you know how to get out of bed in the morning.
Please spend the next year deprogramming yourself and developing real opinions. Using conservative talking points and then trying to pretend you give a fuck is mind glaringly stupid.
It is a fucking lie. Women historically worked FOR MONEY, and you still deny them credit for it to fit your agenda.
5+ years of government paid income to every single household with children is not the standard anywhere. Some European governments give ONE year. You are misrepresenting facts again. And yes, I could get behind some kind of additional welfare for children in poverty, but I don’t think it needs to be universal. My children don’t need welfare checks. Nor do any of my neighbors’ children. Nor do I really believe that yours do; your irresponsibility in representing other numbers makes me doubt the veracity of your own income claims.
The $100k family, my family members, who choose to live their ideology about a woman’s role in the family and outsource the consequences of that decision to the rest of their family/ our family without the family’s consent do excite my frustration, yes. Their repeated poor decisions about money and then expectation that they will be relieved of the consequences of those decision is extremely frustrating. But they are inherently not other. They are blood relations and part of me. Your personal judgments about me continue to be wildly off base.
Are you now going to demonize us for paying for childcare? You have no idea what we paid. We organized a harassment campaign at the first corporate daycare we went to, to get the corporation to pay the staff more and fund their certifications so they would quit leaving. Then we took our business to a non profit daycare, that charged nothing to poor families, and we paid full price, but left because they barely had any kids there. Then we went to a local chain that pays their staff some of the best rates in region.
I don’t know if you noticed, but the rest of the world is getting tired of funding the US’s mountain of debt. And you can tax me more, that’s fine. And you can certainly close all the loopholes for the assholes at the top. But when the rest of the world dumps the dollar, we won’t be able to just make up money and inflate our problems away. We’ll only be able to provide services we can actually pay for. And the amount of money you’re asking for is huge. If you say 11 million people stay home and that is a quarter of families, then your asking for income for $44 million more people for at least 5 years each. What kind of income are you looking for? $30k/yr/ person? That’s $1.3 trillion per year. And if you scoff and say that’s not what you said, it’s because you conveniently left out any specifics to your demand, so I tried to sketch out what you might mean.