Oh dear. A split.

Or did you need to use a substitute to look after your child while you were working?

I see it as hinging around whether we view raising children as an individual lifestyle decision - in which case I guess I'd have to agree it's legitimate to not expect the taxpayer to fund it - or whether we believe there are benefits for all society in supporting greater choice for mothers and parents.

I'm in the second camp and yet I'm also more hesitant these days about giving the state a greater role in how children are raised. There was a time when I'd have had no qualms about it and even welcomed it, but I'm less of that mindset lately, which leaves me stuck on a very spiky fence.

But this, I think, is why we need to talk about it more, even if it does get heated, in fact especially if it gets heated.

Is the socialising of the next generation not work?

Do you agree with tax funding for child minding and education outside the home (that includes schools)?

So my son wasn't "socialised" because I worked? But the stay at home mother's was? What nonsense- if women don't want to work- that's their decision.

Split? Let us know when you've resolved the tucute/truscum war.

Do you agree with tax funding for child minding and education outside the home (that includes schools)?

@Clymene

So much for the echo chamber

I feel a bit sad for OP. They wanted this to be a gloating session. Maybe a few nice screenshots for The Bird and what they got was an interesting and lively discussion and respectable disagreement.

So much for the echo chamber

The surprise at the notion that people might not agree on everything but still join together for a common cause is interesting. One of the things I most appreciate is seeing women across the political spectrum who are standing up for women’s rights. That in itself shows the diversity of thought.

Then why headline it as a ‘split’ rather than another perspective? A contribution to a diversity of views?

Disingenuous.

Disingenuous? No. This particular poster has form for drive by shaming posts aimed at women discussing the potential conflicts on their rights from other groups.

I believe the intention was as mocking as the OP came across.

The OP doesn’t believe anyone disagreeing with them could be disagreeing from a positioned developed ‘independently’ and through active research. Values they supposedly have over each and every one else. Hence they plopped and added a little extra plopper and that will be it til next thread.

There was no intention to engage outside sneering if I remember rightly from interactions in the past.

It needed posting because it is just as relevant as any other post on here. I am of independent mind and not easily persuaded by anyone telling me what I should think

Then why headline it as a ‘split’ rather than another perspective? A contribution to a diversity of views?

Disingenuous.

think Posie upsets some feminists because she demonstrates that feminism is not central to the fight for women's rights.

Now THAT is an interesting thought! I'd have thought there was no difference between these two things - what do you see the difference is?

In the end it's easy as making a tit of yourself on a chat site,

To decide.
There are baddies. Who are they?
Feminists. Awful feminists who have short hair and probably no makeup and hate men and are usually lesbians. Yuck.
Pretty much everyone hates them, always have.

How do they operate? In secret. Probably outside in the countryside. Cloaks and hats for warmth. Black to be hard to spot.
Get together at night and plot how to be horrible to men.
Probably big book with important stuff to refer to.
Older women like soup, get cold. Big fire with pot of soup cooking.

Yep. Evil network of vengeful, only half sane, bitter women.

Yep that's what's going on...

1. Feminism. Loads of branches. Some totally opposite views on some things.

1. Sex > gender is not a feminist only thing.

Read thread. Blimey.

This stuff is not complicated imo.

1. I think issue op has, imo is not internet as a pp said, but more basic and very very common. Especially in one group of people.

1. Women and girls, 30 million ish in UK. Unsurprisingly (to those not on twitter with a huge blocklist), the vast majority think male people in women's prisons, male people in women's sport, male people bimbling in while they are down to undies in gym communal changing. Is just totally unacceptable.

....

'It needed posting because it is just as relevant as any other post on here. I am of independent mind and not easily persuaded by anyone telling me what I should think.'

Lol what a twonk

No one tells me what to think! I can think for myself!

When that extends to knowing a woman is a feminist when SHE has said for years and years. That she is NOT a feminist.
(And she was on MN for ages, posted on fwr often, often resulting in huge Argy bargy because her comments were often, this is why this feminist view is bollocks..)...

Even then OP will not be told what to think!!

Striving to consider lots of different arguments, try to consider without bias, look into veracity of points. Put it all together and accept this discard that. Put it own considerations (valid own views try to spot if your thinking is biased and put to one side).

That's admirable.
Really really difficult.
An effort. And can mean conclusions that you are uncomfy with.

Yes that's really great OP.

What was the independent thought and data etc that led you to conclude PP is a feminist?
Given that... She isn't. And has never been shy about saying so.

What's sad about it? I wanted to work ; if women don't want to, that's their decision but I don't see why tax payers should be expected to subsidise stay at home mothers.

I wouldn't be happy at having always worked full time to pay taxes to allow some other woman to stay at home and tell herself she's a better mother than me

How utterly sad. I remember, when Ireland was going to vote on permitting divorce, meeting an elderly lady who was totally opposed to the idea and that was because she herself had had to put up with a bastard of a husband for over fifty years.

I think the subject of motherhood and women's and children's rights could bear quite a few threads, actually.

And I don't think we should limit ourselves to just thinking about minor tweeks to the status quo.

@toomanytrees who are academic feminists? A lot of the women KJ talks about are not academics. So what is the criteria to be considered an academic feminist?

Didn't you previously vote Labour Kimikos ?

I wouldn't be happy at having always worked full time to pay taxes to allow some other woman to stay at home and tell herself she's a better mother than me.

Feminism tends to take entirely too much credit for the "advances" women have made whether it be voting rights, women's shelters, or women's participation in the work force. Academic feminists mostly just advanced their own careers on the backs of selling a narrative that women are weak, vulnerable and oppressed.

I think Posie upsets some feminists because she demonstrates that feminism is not central to the fight for women's rights.

The OP mentioned the "split" as if it were a bad thing for the fight for women's rights. In fact it indicates entirely the opposite: the vast majority of women (those that don't call themselves feminists) are waking up to the threat to women's rights and children's safety.