6 ms·

> I think women like the author, who are frustrated by how their lives are constricted by pregnancy, should own the very large degree to which they are doing th

by m000 4y ago

> I think women like the author, who are frustrated by how their lives are constricted by pregnancy, should own the very large degree to which they are doing this to themselves. If they want to change it, they need to start with what's going on in their own heads. > The extreme risk aversion some mothers exhibit, and the way it constricts their lives, emphatically does not end at birth, and after birth it begins to constrict the child's freedom as well. The argument being made is that risk aversion didn't develop on its own. Women have been bombarded for decades with guilt/panic inducing guidelines, based on studies which often don't/can't go deeper than corellation of data. A whole industry profits from the situation. Yet, you propose as a "solution" that individual pregnant women should personally stand against these imposed norms, ignore the scoff of their social circle and society, and risk living their life with guilt if things turn the wrong way? This is borderline victim blaming.

civilized 4y ago
Yes, I am proposing precisely that. I understand how it might look like victim blaming, but this is not about blame. It's about agency. There will never be a culture without pressures. But everyone has the power to choose to resist those pressures. I think this is one big way that culture changes. Articles like this can also be part of it. Consider the microwaving. I don't think there is any predatory business or institution pushing that? Wouldn't that especially suggest a bigger role for agency? Could we consider the cognitive biases that make us more receptive to flawed cultural messages, and how we can overcome them? Or is it perhaps possible that the dominant culture messages could be good in the eyes of the people sending those messages, but not good for every individual person that receives those messages?
tgv 4y ago
> Women have been bombarded for decades with guilt/panic inducing guidelines, .... A whole industry profits from the situation. First: you suggest a relation between the two, but does that exist? Second: who are these bombarders? What industry profits? Third: should we just ignore all correlations? Or just those that relate to reproductive rights for women, because that's a hot topic (in the US)?

by m000 4y ago

civilized 4y ago

Yes, I am proposing precisely that. I understand how it might look like victim blaming, but this is not about blame. It's about agency. There will never be a culture without pressures. But everyone has the power to choose to resist those pressures. I think this is one big way that culture changes. Articles like this can also be part of it. Consider the microwaving. I don't think there is any predatory business or institution pushing that? Wouldn't that especially suggest a bigger role for agency? Could we consider the cognitive biases that make us more receptive to flawed cultural messages, and how we can overcome them? Or is it perhaps possible that the dominant culture messages could be good in the eyes of the people sending those messages, but not good for every individual person that receives those messages?

tgv 4y ago

> Women have been bombarded for decades with guilt/panic inducing guidelines, .... A whole industry profits from the situation. First: you suggest a relation between the two, but does that exist? Second: who are these bombarders? What industry profits? Third: should we just ignore all correlations? Or just those that relate to reproductive rights for women, because that's a hot topic (in the US)?