I wouldn't say feminism is necessarily about equality, not the feminist extremists anyway. I believe in equality and being able to make choices without being judged. I also believe men and women are different and we should be able to accept and embrace these differences. I'm not talking about jobs or pay, anyone regardless of gender should be able to work in any jobs that they are capable of doing for the same pay but more in the way that there are some things that men are more naturally suited to and some things that women are more naturally suited to and that's okay. My other half can lift heavier things than me and I don't see it as an insult if I'm struggling to lift something and he does it for me. I know that's a bit of a daft example but nature has made us different physically and mentally and I think it's okay to acknowledge the fact.
Agree
What I've noticed sometimes on this forum is that posters sometimes wish not to acknowledge general obvious gender differences for the sake of saying we are all completely equal.
I'd prefer to say that we now enjoy equality (thankfully!) but at the same time I'm not going to ignore glaringly obvious gender differences for the sake of equality....
What I've noticed sometimes on this forum is that posters sometimes wish not to acknowledge general obvious gender differences for the sake of saying we are all completely equal.
I'd prefer to say that we now enjoy equality (thankfully!) but at the same time I'm not going to ignore glaringly obvious gender differences for the sake of equality....
Again, you confuse sameness with equality. And capability, since men can perfectly well care for children.
Why? Do you think men are less capable of looking after young children?
Feminists on Tumblr actually say this, as Men are constantly suppressing their "inner rape urges" and thus can not be trusted to be around children without being supervised themselves, you know, in case the men just lose control of their basic instinct and rape the children.
Feminists on Tumblr actually say this, as Men are constantly suppressing their "inner rape urges" and thus can not be trusted to be around children without being supervised themselves, you know, in case the men just lose control of their basic instinct and rape the children.
So you do want to make moral choices for people based on your own biases and to disapprove.
Some women aren't as proficient carers as some men. It depends on the person. It's not magic or destiny. It's about time men weren't seen as less capable of bringing up children than women.
I'm not aware I've contradicted myself?
I've never been in agreement with a woman having a baby and then going straight out to work afterwards, and even less in agreement of the sort of woman that feels this deserves some kind of reward - meaning when they say "oh look at me, aren't I clever, just gave birth 5 hours ago and I'm already back at my desk"!
To me, that is beyond selfish.
The comment about the baby being 6 months, is that I've heard of women putting their babies into nursery around this age, and imo this is way too young, and if they really don't want to give up their career, then fine, but at least wait til the baby is a bit older!
Men can bring up children, yes, but when the infant is very very young, the best person for him/her imo will always be the mother.
I've never been in agreement with a woman having a baby and then going straight out to work afterwards, and even less in agreement of the sort of woman that feels this deserves some kind of reward - meaning when they say "oh look at me, aren't I clever, just gave birth 5 hours ago and I'm already back at my desk"!
To me, that is beyond selfish.
The comment about the baby being 6 months, is that I've heard of women putting their babies into nursery around this age, and imo this is way too young, and if they really don't want to give up their career, then fine, but at least wait til the baby is a bit older!
Men can bring up children, yes, but when the infant is very very young, the best person for him/her imo will always be the mother.
So when is the threshold where men become able to look after small children and why? What is it they lack that women don't?
Again, you confuse sameness with equality. And capability, since men can perfectly well care for children.
Men can care perfectly well for children..........but when they're babies? Maybe they can still, but to me, it's preferable and more natural for the mother to be present in the first year at least.
So when is the threshold where men become able to look after small children and why? What is it they lack that women don't?
Obviously men don't have the same maternal instinct that a woman has, due to not having a womb. And also due to not having carried the baby around inside her body for 9 months.
I've already that men are perfectly capable of looking after a baby, but to me, it's preferable that the baby has its mother first and foremost in their very early years.
If the mother cannot be there for whatever reason, then the father will obviously have to be, but I can't say that it would be the most ideal situation.
Obviously men don't have the same maternal instinct that a woman has, due to not having a womb. And also due to not having carried the baby around inside her body for 9 months.
I've already that men are perfectly capable of looking after a baby, but to me, it's preferable that the baby has its mother first and foremost in their very early years.
If the mother cannot be there for whatever reason, then the father will obviously have to be, but I can't say that it would be the most ideal situation.
The ideal situation - if such a thing even exists or is possible for most families - is dependent upon the family, not some set of arbitrary rules. If the mother is the main breadwinner for the family it's obviously more sensible for her to return to work. In many professions, taking 2-3 years out basically kills a person's chance of getting back into it.
Obviously men don't have the same maternal instinct that a woman has, due to not having a womb. And also due to not having carried the baby around inside her body for 9 months.
I've already that men are perfectly capable of looking after a baby, but to me, it's preferable that the baby has its mother first and foremost in their very early years.
If the mother cannot be there for whatever reason, then the father will obviously have to be, but I can't say that it would be the most ideal situation.
Men have paternal instinct. Are you saying men don't care for their children as much as women?
If it is about bonding...then surely it is fathers who should have more time with their babies to make up for the fact that they did not carry them for nine months.
The ideal situation - if such a thing even exists or is possible for most families - is dependent upon the family, not some set of arbitrary rules. If the mother is the main breadwinner for the family it's obviously more sensible for her to return to work. In many professions, taking 2-3 years out basically kills a person's chance of getting back into it.
Well quite. Babies need love and care... fathers are perfectly capable of giving that and each family (which may of course have two fathers or two mothers instead of one of each) should decide what is best for them. One of my team stayed at home to look after his son for the first year because his wife was finishing her training... otherwise they would not have been able to provide the home they wanted to for their family.
I've never been in agreement with a woman having a baby and then going straight out to work afterwards, and even less in agreement of the sort of woman that feels this deserves some kind of reward - meaning when they say "oh look at me, aren't I clever, just gave birth 5 hours ago and I'm already back at my desk"!
To me, that is beyond selfish.
The comment about the baby being 6 months, is that I've heard of women putting their babies into nursery around this age, and imo this is way too young, and if they really don't want to give up their career, then fine, but at least wait til the baby is a bit older!
Men can bring up children, yes, but when the infant is very very young, the best person for him/her imo will always be the mother.
What's wrong with a baby being in nursery? Surely it's better for a baby if the parents are working and better able to fill the cupboards?
I'm currently on maternity leave, my daughter is 6 months old. I've been working part time since she was 3 months old and will be returning to full time in a few weeks. She will be in nursery 3 days and her grandparents the other 2 whilst I am working.
I have absolutely no choice. We are through the last of our savings, we just cannot afford to only have one earner in the house.
Am I worried me returning to work will have a negative effect on my daughter? Not at all. She will benefit more from me working than she would if I continue with maternity.
Why? Do you think men are less capable of looking after young children?
It's not so much that they're less capable, it's more to do with when a woman has a baby, and almost immediately goes back to work, putting the baby into nursery at a really tiny age, that is what I disagree with.
Yes I've stated a few times now, men are capable of looking after children, but for me, I'd hate to leave my 6 month old baby with my husband and go out to work leaving him to look after the baby. As I would feel I should be the one to do that. Especially at that tender age.
I hope you'll agree with me on this other point though.....;
That a woman should and normally does feel worse at leaving her baby to go to work, than a man would ever do. And I think that is obviously to do with the greater bond the mother has with the baby, due to carrying it for 9 months, and that is something that the man can't compete with.
The ideal situation - if such a thing even exists or is possible for most families - is dependent upon the family, not some set of arbitrary rules. If the mother is the main breadwinner for the family it's obviously more sensible for her to return to work. In many professions, taking 2-3 years out basically kills a person's chance of getting back into it.
Well, ok, although if the woman feels that her career comes before her children, then why bother having children in the first place. Just have her career?
If you're so career minded, that your baby will be brought up by people paid to do it, and not through love, then as I've said before, what actually is the point in having them in the first place?
Men have paternal instinct. Are you saying men don't care for their children as much as women?
If it is about bonding...then surely it is fathers who should have more time with their babies to make up for the fact that they did not carry them for nine months.
No, I'm not saying that men don't care as much.
I don't know why some people choose not to believe the obvious!
Of course men can bring up and raise kids, but for me, if the mother is there to do it, then it's better.
It's not so much that they're less capable, it's more to do with when a woman has a baby, and almost immediately goes back to work, putting the baby into nursery at a really tiny age, that is what I disagree with.
Yes I've stated a few times now, men are capable of looking after children, but for me, I'd hate to leave my 6 month old baby with my husband and go out to work leaving him to look after the baby. As I would feel I should be the one to do that. Especially at that tender age.
I hope you'll agree with me on this other point though.....;
That a woman should and normally does feel worse at leaving her baby to go to work, than a man would ever do. And I think that is obviously to do with the greater bond the mother has with the baby, due to carrying it for 9 months, and that is something that the man can't compete with.
If men are capable of looking after the child and the child and parents are happy then where is the 'selfishness' if the woman goes back to work? If you feel that for yourself then that is up to you... but judging other women seems completely unreasonable. Especially when you add your last point... if women feel worse about leaving their child then how can they possibly be selfish for doing so... surely if they feel they must go back to work in order to earn money to support their family even though they will suffer by parting from their child then that is a selfless act?
What's wrong with a baby being in nursery? Surely it's better for a baby if the parents are working and better able to fill the cupboards?
I'm currently on maternity leave, my daughter is 6 months old. I've been working part time since she was 3 months old and will be returning to full time in a few weeks. She will be in nursery 3 days and her grandparents the other 2 whilst I am working.
I have absolutely no choice. We are through the last of our savings, we just cannot afford to only have one earner in the house.
Am I worried me returning to work will have a negative effect on my daughter? Not at all. She will benefit more from me working than she would if I continue with maternity.
If that makes me selfish, so be it.
Well obviously if you have to work, then you have to work, due to finances and so forth. But if you didn't have to, and you were able to stay at home, and then maybe after a while, do a part time job, would you not choose that?
My sister is in the same boat. My nephew is 2 months. She'll be going back to work in two months time though only for part time, so my Mum is going to have him for five days a week, for the whole morning. Problem is that she might have to go back to work full time next year. Not because she wants to, but it's a question of having to. And for me, I feel sorry that she's in that position.
I think I'd judge women more if it was a personal choice to go back to work, meaning they didn't have to (and I don't count part time as the same) but for the women that do, due to finances, then it's different of course.
I don't know why some people choose not to believe the obvious!
Of course men can bring up and raise kids, but for me, if the mother is there to do it, then it's better.
The point though is that it isn't obvious... you have not articulated any reason for your belief other than 'I think this is so'. This is a classic 'always done that way' argument and it doesn't hold water unless you think men are worse than women at childcare.
Feminists on Tumblr actually say this, as Men are constantly suppressing their "inner rape urges" and thus can not be trusted to be around children without being supervised themselves, you know, in case the men just lose control of their basic instinct and rape the children.
I think one of the problems with this debate is that the idea of Tumblr being in any way representative of anything in the real world seems to have inexplicably gained currency.
If men are capable of looking after the child and the child and parents are happy then where is the 'selfishness' if the woman goes back to work? If you feel that for yourself then that is up to you... but judging other women seems completely unreasonable. Especially when you add your last point... if women feel worse about leaving their child then how can they possibly be selfish for doing so... surely if they feel they must go back to work in order to earn money to support their family even though they will suffer by parting from their child then that is a selfless act?
If it is a question of finances, then of course, sometimes it can't be avoided.
If it were me, I'd think of anything I could before accepting full time work, and my baby in full time nursery. Meaning, do part time work. Of course, that isn't possible in every situation.
Well, ok, although if the woman feels that her career comes before her children, then why bother having children in the first place. Just have her career?
If you're so career minded, that your baby will be brought up by people paid to do it, and not through love, then as I've said before, what actually is the point in having them in the first place?
Perhaps because some women - like some men - would like to have both a career and kids? As long as the child is properly cared for then it really isn't your place to enforce your values on other people. There are lots of ways to organise a family, and which approach is best is a personal decision.
Also, I'm going to wager that quite a few people might get just a teeny bit annoyed at your insulation that people who put their kids in nurseries love them less than those who don't. Nurseries are beneficial to kids in many ways, you do realise?
Also, I'm going to wager that quite a few people might get just a teeny bit annoyed at your insulation that people who put their kids in nurseries love them less than those who don't. Nurseries are beneficial to kids in many ways, you do realise?
If it is a question of finances, then of course, sometimes it can't be avoided.
If it were me, I'd think of anything I could before accepting full time work, and my baby in full time nursery. Meaning, do part time work. Of course, that isn't possible in every situation.
So basically if a woman continues to work because she likes to work then it is selfish, but it wouldn't be if a man did the same, even though both are just as capable of caring for their children.
Don't you see that this is an artificial divide where none needs to be? You are judging women for doing something that you would not judge a man for... and also, by implication, perpetuating the myth that men are somehow less able to competently look after young children. An attitude that is still used to deny men custody and access to their children following divorce/separation.
Comments
What I've noticed sometimes on this forum is that posters sometimes wish not to acknowledge general obvious gender differences for the sake of saying we are all completely equal.
I'd prefer to say that we now enjoy equality (thankfully!) but at the same time I'm not going to ignore glaringly obvious gender differences for the sake of equality....
http://img1.nymag.com/imgs/daily/vulture/2015/gifs/frank-sideeye-002.w529.h352.2x.gif
I couldn't care less what a few stupid people say.
I've never been in agreement with a woman having a baby and then going straight out to work afterwards, and even less in agreement of the sort of woman that feels this deserves some kind of reward - meaning when they say "oh look at me, aren't I clever, just gave birth 5 hours ago and I'm already back at my desk"!
To me, that is beyond selfish.
The comment about the baby being 6 months, is that I've heard of women putting their babies into nursery around this age, and imo this is way too young, and if they really don't want to give up their career, then fine, but at least wait til the baby is a bit older!
Men can bring up children, yes, but when the infant is very very young, the best person for him/her imo will always be the mother.
So when is the threshold where men become able to look after small children and why? What is it they lack that women don't?
I've already that men are perfectly capable of looking after a baby, but to me, it's preferable that the baby has its mother first and foremost in their very early years.
If the mother cannot be there for whatever reason, then the father will obviously have to be, but I can't say that it would be the most ideal situation.
The ideal situation - if such a thing even exists or is possible for most families - is dependent upon the family, not some set of arbitrary rules. If the mother is the main breadwinner for the family it's obviously more sensible for her to return to work. In many professions, taking 2-3 years out basically kills a person's chance of getting back into it.
Men have paternal instinct. Are you saying men don't care for their children as much as women?
If it is about bonding...then surely it is fathers who should have more time with their babies to make up for the fact that they did not carry them for nine months.
Well quite. Babies need love and care... fathers are perfectly capable of giving that and each family (which may of course have two fathers or two mothers instead of one of each) should decide what is best for them. One of my team stayed at home to look after his son for the first year because his wife was finishing her training... otherwise they would not have been able to provide the home they wanted to for their family.
What's wrong with a baby being in nursery? Surely it's better for a baby if the parents are working and better able to fill the cupboards?
I'm currently on maternity leave, my daughter is 6 months old. I've been working part time since she was 3 months old and will be returning to full time in a few weeks. She will be in nursery 3 days and her grandparents the other 2 whilst I am working.
I have absolutely no choice. We are through the last of our savings, we just cannot afford to only have one earner in the house.
Am I worried me returning to work will have a negative effect on my daughter? Not at all. She will benefit more from me working than she would if I continue with maternity.
If that makes me selfish, so be it.
Yes I've stated a few times now, men are capable of looking after children, but for me, I'd hate to leave my 6 month old baby with my husband and go out to work leaving him to look after the baby. As I would feel I should be the one to do that. Especially at that tender age.
I hope you'll agree with me on this other point though.....;
That a woman should and normally does feel worse at leaving her baby to go to work, than a man would ever do. And I think that is obviously to do with the greater bond the mother has with the baby, due to carrying it for 9 months, and that is something that the man can't compete with.
If you're so career minded, that your baby will be brought up by people paid to do it, and not through love, then as I've said before, what actually is the point in having them in the first place?
I don't know why some people choose not to believe the obvious!
Of course men can bring up and raise kids, but for me, if the mother is there to do it, then it's better.
If men are capable of looking after the child and the child and parents are happy then where is the 'selfishness' if the woman goes back to work? If you feel that for yourself then that is up to you... but judging other women seems completely unreasonable. Especially when you add your last point... if women feel worse about leaving their child then how can they possibly be selfish for doing so... surely if they feel they must go back to work in order to earn money to support their family even though they will suffer by parting from their child then that is a selfless act?
My sister is in the same boat. My nephew is 2 months. She'll be going back to work in two months time though only for part time, so my Mum is going to have him for five days a week, for the whole morning. Problem is that she might have to go back to work full time next year. Not because she wants to, but it's a question of having to. And for me, I feel sorry that she's in that position.
I think I'd judge women more if it was a personal choice to go back to work, meaning they didn't have to (and I don't count part time as the same) but for the women that do, due to finances, then it's different of course.
The point though is that it isn't obvious... you have not articulated any reason for your belief other than 'I think this is so'. This is a classic 'always done that way' argument and it doesn't hold water unless you think men are worse than women at childcare.
I think one of the problems with this debate is that the idea of Tumblr being in any way representative of anything in the real world seems to have inexplicably gained currency.
If it were me, I'd think of anything I could before accepting full time work, and my baby in full time nursery. Meaning, do part time work. Of course, that isn't possible in every situation.
Perhaps because some women - like some men - would like to have both a career and kids? As long as the child is properly cared for then it really isn't your place to enforce your values on other people. There are lots of ways to organise a family, and which approach is best is a personal decision.
Also, I'm going to wager that quite a few people might get just a teeny bit annoyed at your insulation that people who put their kids in nurseries love them less than those who don't. Nurseries are beneficial to kids in many ways, you do realise?
Oh God, it's the bloody Pinocchio .gif all over again...
I think that's the intention!
So basically if a woman continues to work because she likes to work then it is selfish, but it wouldn't be if a man did the same, even though both are just as capable of caring for their children.
Don't you see that this is an artificial divide where none needs to be? You are judging women for doing something that you would not judge a man for... and also, by implication, perpetuating the myth that men are somehow less able to competently look after young children. An attitude that is still used to deny men custody and access to their children following divorce/separation.
When it comes to breastfeeding, yes!