3 ms·
> predominantly caused by telling women they should prioritise education and career over children Who is “telling them that”? Society by allowing them to open
by tw04 10mo ago
> predominantly caused by telling women they should prioritise education and career over children
Who is “telling them that”? Society by allowing them to open a checking account? Women’s suffrage? The reality is that other than the most privileged, a modern family can’t afford to function without both parents working. I assume you’re for raising the minimum wage to allow a family to run on a single income with multiple children? Or your solution is to send us back to the dark ages and remove womens rights?
> enabling the invention of the single mother who survives on government largesse.
There’s literally nobody who has kids as a single mother with the goal of raising them on welfare, that might be the single most ridiculous statement in this thread.
> Separating church and state appears to be contributing at least to some extent.
The Russian Orthodox Church is government sponsored. How’s their birth rate going?
- singpolyma3 10mo agoIt's definitely not true that both parents need to work. I know many families where only one parent has an income, and it is a very low income (one works as a mover for example) and they manage to eat and live etc. Do they live upper middle class on this income? No. But they do live and have multiple children.
- tw04 10mo agoAnd I can guarantee they’re on government assistance because I know what a “mover” makes, and I know what diapers and formula cost, and they aren’t paying for multiple children on that salary alone.
- singpolyma3 10mo agoI can promise you they are not. One of the families in question doesn't even get their tax credits because they are too far behind on filing. It's just the mover income. They have to make it work and since they must, they do They don't buy formula obviously and they cloth diaper with used stuff from marketplace. To cover the two examples you gave
- joquarky 10mo agoWhat's your point? We should all aspire to this? I'm reminded of a 90s comedy series that had a regular segment that lampooned how some families worked 3 or more jobs. I never found it all that funny given that it was a reality for my family.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 10mo ago> We should all aspire to this? Yes, we should all aspire to have our children's mother at home during the child's developmental years rather than letting it be a string of minimum-wage strangers. If you can't manage that, oh well, it happens... but that's the ideal that we should all want. And wouldn't it be a hell of a world, where the single income could support such a family? >I'm reminded of a 90s comedy series that had a regular segment that lampooned how some families worked 3 or more jobs. Someone above asked "who was telling them X". Well, in your case, it was 90s sitcoms. Not just your case, everyone's really. Sitcoms have been used to negatively portray what should be ideals since at least the 1970s.