5 ms·

> What a fantastic way to dismissively say "Raising children is work that is of zero benefit to the human species and a complete waste of time. I don’t know if

> What a fantastic way to dismissively say "Raising children is work that is of zero benefit to the human species and a complete waste of time. I don’t know if there was an edit to the previous post, but “Excluded from many intellectual pursuits” does not mean anything like what you are saying. Isn’t it possible to lament a historic lack of choice without demeaning homemakers?

DoreenMichele 5y ago
A. I'm reacting to It's surprising that human society has survived. B. Also the part you quoted implicitly suggests raising children takes no brains. I was one of the top three students of my graduating high school class, won a National Merit Scholarship, among other things, and was a full-time wife and mom for a lot of years. I homeschooled my twice exceptional sons because no other school was really capable of adequately serving their needs. My oldest tested at senior in college level in science at age 11 and also below grade level in writing. Addressing his needs required me to present high level materials without watering them down while accommodating his weaknesses. I take personal offense at the idea that full-time moms are not doing useful work and raising children is something any idiot can do well. The world would be a better place if we worried more about raising our children well. Studies show that investing in preschoolers saves money down the line by lowering prison costs for society. Edit in response to your edit: Isn’t it possible to lament a historic lack of choice without demeaning homemakers? Absolutely. But the comment in question doesn't manage to do so.
- xvector 5y ago
  This really feels like an over-reaction. > I take personal offense at the idea that full-time moms are not doing useful work and raising children is something any idiot can do well. Where was this even remotely implied? OP said: > It's surprising that human society has survived, given that half the population was artificially excluded from many intellectual pursuits - or many pursuits full stop Even if you disagree with the premise - how in any way does this demean homemakers? What a bizarre reaction.
  - mattcwilson 5y ago
    I believe the idea here is that suggesting any degree of “surprise” that human society has survived implies that the work women were excluded from was more vital to human society’s survival than what most or all of those excluded women were actually doing at that time.
    - xvector 5y ago
      Thanks for the explanation. I didn't see it that way at all, but I can understand why it might be offensive now. To me it read as "It is surprising that a species so stupid/incompetent as to arbitrarily exclude half their members has managed to survive this far."
  - spoonjim 5y ago
    You’re talking to a user with a history of bizarre overreaction — you may not know that. Check the post history.
abraae 5y ago
There was no edit to my original content, and I'm astonished that anyone could read into it that raising children is work of zero value - that has nothing whatsoever to do with what I said.

DoreenMichele 5y ago

A. I'm reacting to It's surprising that human society has survived. B. Also the part you quoted implicitly suggests raising children takes no brains. I was one of the top three students of my graduating high school class, won a National Merit Scholarship, among other things, and was a full-time wife and mom for a lot of years. I homeschooled my twice exceptional sons because no other school was really capable of adequately serving their needs. My oldest tested at senior in college level in science at age 11 and also below grade level in writing. Addressing his needs required me to present high level materials without watering them down while accommodating his weaknesses. I take personal offense at the idea that full-time moms are not doing useful work and raising children is something any idiot can do well. The world would be a better place if we worried more about raising our children well. Studies show that investing in preschoolers saves money down the line by lowering prison costs for society. Edit in response to your edit: Isn’t it possible to lament a historic lack of choice without demeaning homemakers? Absolutely. But the comment in question doesn't manage to do so.

xvector 5y ago
This really feels like an over-reaction. > I take personal offense at the idea that full-time moms are not doing useful work and raising children is something any idiot can do well. Where was this even remotely implied? OP said: > It's surprising that human society has survived, given that half the population was artificially excluded from many intellectual pursuits - or many pursuits full stop Even if you disagree with the premise - how in any way does this demean homemakers? What a bizarre reaction.
- mattcwilson 5y ago
  I believe the idea here is that suggesting any degree of “surprise” that human society has survived implies that the work women were excluded from was more vital to human society’s survival than what most or all of those excluded women were actually doing at that time.
  - xvector 5y ago
    Thanks for the explanation. I didn't see it that way at all, but I can understand why it might be offensive now. To me it read as "It is surprising that a species so stupid/incompetent as to arbitrarily exclude half their members has managed to survive this far."
- spoonjim 5y ago
  You’re talking to a user with a history of bizarre overreaction — you may not know that. Check the post history.

abraae 5y ago

There was no edit to my original content, and I'm astonished that anyone could read into it that raising children is work of zero value - that has nothing whatsoever to do with what I said.