121–130 of 325 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Sort of, but not really. Obviously it's possible for the man to be the care giver, but there is a significant unavoidable amount of time required by the mother through pregnancy and recovery that makes it more logical for men to be primarily in the non-caregiver role, but sure it does violate some people's narrative even it's been the majority case since the inception of humanity.
> childcare needs to give parents an actual break. In my experience caring for your small children is really demanding work. On the one hand you need to be focused on the situation in order to protect the children and on the other hand there is not much going on for entertaining yourself. Creative or focused deep work where you get a positive feeling of accomplishment also counts as a break from childcare for me. So…
> In my experience caring for your small children is really demanding work. On the one hand you need to be focused on the situation in order to protect the children I expected this going into having children, but I was surprised at how much I actually enjoyed it. Yes, it’s more active work than sitting in front of a computer, but for me personally I’ve found it much less demanding than my jobs. > and on the other han…
I mean, first time and second time. But when they get excited 55th time over exactly same hedgehog, it just was not so exciting to me anymore.
I hate those types of "research" that base all their "findings" on observation of what is undesirable primitive living. What's more they don't even meaningfully quantify what can be qualified as neglect or abuse. My opinion as well as my own experience is that those children are far more likely to be subjected to much higher levels of abuse and neglect in this type of situation. As someone who has been neglected by h…
I’ve been down this alley. No-one will understand you. Now I just moved back to being a normal person seemingly integrated and all in favour of feminism and all this shit, and I just laugh internally every time a woman tells me “I have been raped.” In my city, they add “But don’t tell anyone, it will make people racist.” Every. Single. Time. Ahh, it’s already bad enough that I know several of them. Not very healthy,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. I grew up poor and moved far away from my family to change it. In the rich land where I now live, most people I’ve met could do a little better by moving to another town but they choose to remain close to their families and their birth community. With that said, they still have to raise their children on their own, because it is culturally inappropriate to ask, accept or (god forbid![^1]) offer help. [^1]: You…
I am guessing women have low labor force participation rates in the poor land you moved from ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> As both sexes flooded the labor pool, wages got depressed, and marriage declined. Corporations did not force both sexes to flood the labor pool. Women wanted (and fought) to gain the ability to be paid. To reduce their struggle and achievement as a “corporate conspiracy” is an insult. Might businesses influence people’s decisions with marketing? Sure. But that is not why people yearn to be financially independent.…
Insult or not, well-meaning movements are often hijacked and co-opted by corporations and governments. Women's lib is just one example. People are often not given a choice, individually or even collectively. For example when Crimea overwhelmingly (94%) voted in 1991 to be independent of Ukraine, no one honored it. Then 6 months later they voted 54% for Ukraine to be independent of USSR, and that was taken as them wan…
To be honest it won't take much longer, because this system by itself creates poisonous inter sex competition that ensure a very low level of reproduction. The numbers are already in. So, either it gets replaced by alternative ways of organizing society (it's already somewhat happening in some places, the problem is the alternatives are a lot less nice) or some spark ignites a revolt that brings back some balance.
But from where I stand it's probably over already. Nobody seems to question having both sex/parents working (and often competing for the same job!) and women definitely do not want to take the breadwinner role after somewhat refusing the homemaker role. But that's very consistent with reality of interacting with women. In my opinion any society that start to listen to the infinite demands of women is doomed to failure. I don't have much to bet but so far, I'm winning...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not wanting to be a parent is one thing, but people who don't want to be involved with kids need to work on themselves, that's a deeply antisocial trait - your own existence depended on everyone around you being involved with you to some degree.
That is an opinion, not a fact. Freedom of association and to be happy can include not interacting with children you choose not to, and optimizing for happiness is important (versus a social contract requiring otherwise). No one will optimize for your own happiness besides you. I have kids, but fully respect people who don’t care for or want to avoid time and interaction with kids. I respect their boundaries, that is…
in a city i can't choose my neighbors, but some neighbors don't like kids and will complain if they are to noisy because they are playing soccer in the yard, to the point that they force the building management to disallow it, which then takes a lawsuit from the parents to remove that rule because such a rule is in fact illegal since kids playing is natural had has to be tolerated.
if someone feels that kids playing infringes their boundaries then they do need an attitude adjustment.
> "For more than 95% of our evolutionary history we lived as hunter-gatherers. Therefore, contemporary hunter-gatherer societies can offer clues as to whether there are certain child-rearing systems to which infants, and their mothers, may be psychologically adapted," You can cherry pick anything that fits a narrative. This narrative advocates for more funding for state sponsored daycare, which does not resemble anyt…
You realize that off-loading overwhelmed parents even a bit is already a massive step in positive direction for literally everybody including companies and taxman, and kindergartens can help a lot. You can be much happier and better parent when rested rather than being semi-constantly on the verge of breakdown. Who hasn't walked this valley with at least 2 kids can't really comprehend the topic appropriately. Apart m…
It would cost way less money to everyone, while allowing more diversity and more actual ressource to be used for the child instead of stupid bureaucracy...
But it looks like you are deep into communist propaganda, as if a third-party institution run by a government would be empowering anything instead of completely destroying everything, including the society it stands on...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is an opinion, not a fact. Freedom of association and to be happy can include not interacting with children you choose not to, and optimizing for happiness is important (versus a social contract requiring otherwise). No one will optimize for your own happiness besides you. I have kids, but fully respect people who don’t care for or want to avoid time and interaction with kids. I respect their boundaries, that is…
it is one thing to ask someone who doesn't want to deal with kids for help taking care of them, but quite another to expect them to tolerate kids and behave in a manner that gives the kids space they need. (like not smoking near kids, etc) in a city i can't choose my neighbors, but some neighbors don't like kids and will complain if they are to noisy because they are playing soccer in the yard, to the point that they…
> the researchers say that children may be "evolutionarily primed" to expect exceptionally high levels of physical contact and care, What strikes me here is the phrase, "exceptionally high levels." I imagine children need a "normal" level of care; it's only "exceptionally high" in comparison to the deprived state of family systems in these degenerate times. I often reflect on the understanding in Attachment Theory, w…
[flagged]
What it seems to suggest more strongly is that the modern (capitalist in general and American in particular) destruction of the traditional extended support networks (both family and nonfamily) in favor of tiny, more mobile, atomic social units that are easier to plug in to places convenient for industrial needs is unhealthy.
Reverting to "traditional" gender roles in the modern capitalist family structure doesn't get you many caregivers (and especially not "personal attention from several caregivers in addition to their biological parents", as the paper points out seems to be important), reverting to an otherwise more traditional family structure even without reverting to "traditional" gender roles does.
In fact, in any family structure, not making child care part of an exclusive gender role gets you more caregivers, each with more time to recharge, but you need a bigger support network, not just different roles within it, for what this article is discussing. To borrow a phrase, "It takes a village..."