To think that whilst maternity & paternity leave is so crap women don’t have choice?

[guardiansofthegalaxychocs]

Read this very upbeat article in the guardian that suggests that it should be celebrated that more women are choosing to be child free. I have absolutely no issue with women choosing to be child free…. But I really struggle with the idea that women can truly have a choice whilst the cost of living is so insanely high, neither paid breaks (maternity, paternity etc) nor subsidised childcare are remotely adequate. We also know that high numbers of women experience terrible discrimination in the workplace.

This chirpy girl power article feels like a sort throwback to of feminism, which did us no good at all.

What we need is longer and better paid parental leave and then after that better and more subsidised childcare including relatives being able to get subsidies.

Then we can truly celebrate that women have choice.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/30/if-youre-childless-at-30-and-that-is-your-choice-isnt-that-something-we-should-applaud?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR3NjWennDmPh-zgXOWGnOdWklLz0V6Qvhic23dZzah6laqbUKeELvDpWVg#Echobox=1643540688

The '50's housewife' must be the most successful propaganda tool of all time. That stereotype, of the lovely stay at home mother, dutifully tending to her home and children, was a result of the state clearly delineating a role for women that centred around reproduction. They enforced it by ensuring women had very little opportunity for independence - no access to credit, no maternity leave, forced out of jobs when they got married (in some cases). Society needed women to repopulate after the war and governments set about making that happen. Women are a bit more wise to this sort of thing now, so in the future such pandering tactics might not work and more serious coercion might be needed. It is notable though that men like to remind women how kind they were to give women rights - with the implication that those rights could be taken away if men feel it necessary. Abortion rights are the ones often messed with. That's not a coincidence.

The notion that having children is a personal choice that requires no input or support from wider society is the most purely distilled form of misogyny available. The fact that women sacrifice their personal health and wellbeing, risk death, illness, injury and trauma, to literally keep the species in existence and people shrug and say 'personal choice innit' is mindbogglingly disrespectful. It shows really clearly how anything a woman does, even producing life from her own body, will be devalued and belittled and seen as nothing special.

@Jaxhog

Why is it the responsibility of the rest of us to subsidise parents? Surely it is the responsibility of would-be parents to calculate whether they can afford to have children! Which often means making a choice between a family and other worldly goods.

In other countries e.g. Hungary, Poland, Italy, S. Korea, Japan they are giving parents monetary incentives to boost their low birth rates.

National and local governments are doing it because they realise without young people they face long term population decline, which has an effect on the long term economy.

Funny thing it isn't working as the reasons for their low birth rates are due to their social and family culture.

Doesn’t then the lack of response in those countries to financial incentives to have children, combined with the fact that some of the lowest birthrates are in countries which actually have very good parental leave arrangements and pay and heavily subsidised childcare, imply that women not having children probably is far more to do with them actively choosing to be childfree, and not because they can’t afford it / maternity pay is rubbish?

@TheDailyCarbunkle
The species is under no threat of extinction due to too few children being born! In fact, the opposite is true- danger to the species due to overpopulation of the plant. So why in the current situation is it “misogyny” to not over encourage yet more over population? You throw out “misogyny” but seem to lack the understanding that current policies on maternity leave and child subsidies have to be based on the reality of an overpopulated world. Not some rainbow, unicorn, love all women crap.

[quote EmpressCixi]@TheDailyCarbunkle
The species is under no threat of extinction due to too few children being born! In fact, the opposite is true- danger to the species due to overpopulation of the plant. So why in the current situation is it “misogyny” to not over encourage yet more over population? You throw out “misogyny” but seem to lack the understanding that current policies on maternity leave and child subsidies have to be based on the reality of an overpopulated world. Not some rainbow, unicorn, love all women crap.[/quote]
After bitter experience, I find it helps to remember that MN generally doesn’t care about womens’ rights, only mothers’ rights.

@ComtesseDeSpair there is more to raising a child than giving parents money around the time they are born.

I know one of my friends wives, who is Japanese, wouldn't have had children if she hadn't met him and moved to the UK. She doesn't want to be old here, but she didn't want to have children there.

It isn’t just the costs associated with children, its the practicalities, childcare often has poor hours, the facilities that do offer decent hours are booked up very very quickly.

We’re both taking six months of adoption leave, with the first six weeks together, we’re also then going to use annual leave to extend our leave to make the introduction to nursery two days a week quite slowly. We’re not eligible for adoption pay, even if we were, both of our employers discriminate against adopters so we wouldn’t receive the same package that birth parent employees get.

It would be interesting to see how many people decide not to have children purely on a cost basis and nothing else.

@EmpressCixi you are talking at a global level while @TheDailyCarbunkle is talking at a national level.

The UK for over the last 48 years has had a fertility rate of lower than 2.1 which means the population is aging and should start decreasing around 2045. We are already facing problems with not enough carers and healthcare staff, and there are many other areas in the economy that have skills shortages.

@EmpressCixi do you really think this current UK government actually thinks on a global level about population? Do you think they think long term about what the UK economy needs?

Some governments with low birth rates realise they need to encourage people in their country to have more children by giving parents incentives to deal with the future economic need. This isn't rainbows and unicorns it is thinking ahead. Unfortunately for them if their societies are misogynistic then no amount of incentives will increase this.

Other countries encourage immigration into their country to deal with economic need now and plan to use the same policy in future e.g. US but this ignores there are only so many people trained up in other countries with particularly skills who want to migrate to your country.

Many women on MN care very much about women's rights. Unfortunately in order to discuss them we are banished to the naughty corner of the feminism board and shouted down if we try to raise issues anywhere else.

That was in response to pp who said MN doesn't care about womens rights.

[quote EmpressCixi]@TheDailyCarbunkle
The species is under no threat of extinction due to too few children being born! In fact, the opposite is true- danger to the species due to overpopulation of the plant. So why in the current situation is it “misogyny” to not over encourage yet more over population? You throw out “misogyny” but seem to lack the understanding that current policies on maternity leave and child subsidies have to be based on the reality of an overpopulated world. Not some rainbow, unicorn, love all women crap.[/quote]
You don't seem to understand what I'm saying @EmpressCixi. If every woman decided tomorrow never to have babies, the human race would die out within about 100 years (probably sooner as a lack of young people would quickly collapse most systems that keep us alive). It doesn't matter whether the world is overpopulated or not, it's vital that women continue having babies so that we don't become extinct.

I don't know where you got the rainbow unicorn thing. That's just weird.

The species is under no threat of extinction due to too few children being born!

True but there are not enough children born in many western countries to sustain the ageing population. Yes there are other options, but the Venn diagram of people who are against parental leave and benefits to encourage people having children, and people who are against immigration and think everybody should stay in their own country is usually one circle.

@Orangello

The species is under no threat of extinction due to too few children being born!

True but there are not enough children born in many western countries to sustain the ageing population. Yes there are other options, but the Venn diagram of people who are against parental leave and benefits to encourage people having children, and people who are against immigration and think everybody should stay in their own country is usually one circle.

Well and the well known and proven solution to that problem is to emigrate OAPs to sunny, warm countries with high birth rates and immigrate young workers from those some countries.

Good border policies and immigration/emigration regulations can be win win by countries with high birth rates being able to send some of their jobless youth to us, while we sent some of the OAPs who want that villa abroad to them.

You can do this to manage demographics of a relatively stable population. Immigration/emigration can be made close to zero net, so no need for anyone to get over-populated.

Sad thing is the laws don’t quite achieve this, but it can be done with a bit of competent government management (instead of the nincompoops we have in power now).

@TheDailyCarbunkle
If every woman decided tomorrow never to have babies, the human race would die out within about 100 years

Not a chance of that happening. Lol. That’s a dystopian fantasy right there. Evil unicorn, and anti-rainbow territory.

@endofagain

Many women on MN care very much about women's rights. Unfortunately in order to discuss them we are banished to the naughty corner of the feminism board and shouted down if we try to raise issues anywhere else.

Weird, because I only ever see feminism/misogyny mentioned in relation to maternity issues. And it garners a lot of support when it is mentioned. Anything that affects women without children? At best, crickets. At worst, those complaining are told off for advancing a position that doesn't categorically prioritise mothers.

[quote EmpressCixi]@TheDailyCarbunkle
If every woman decided tomorrow never to have babies, the human race would die out within about 100 years

Not a chance of that happening. Lol. That’s a dystopian fantasy right there. Evil unicorn, and anti-rainbow territory.[/quote]
You're really not making any sense.

I see all sorts of concerns about women's health and access to medical care, often related but not limited to perimenopause/menopause, osteoporosis, conditions related to menstruation, endometriosis, breast and cervical cancer, cardiac conditions and the way female specific symptoms are often ignored, autoimmune disease (more common in women), just to name a few.
Then there are employment issues and equal pay.
Sexual harassment/assault.
The shameful state of violence against women and girls and lack of convictions for rape.
The deplorable situation around women's prisons, refuges, rape crisis centres, toilets (or lack of).
The way the family courts allow abuse of women to continue after escaping domestic violence and coercive control.
I am sure others can think of more things that MNers are very concerned and vocal about.

That said, this thread is about parental leave, so children do feature.

@TheDailyCarbunkle
You're really not making any sense.

Step away from the weed and perhaps you’ll see you’re the one not making any sense with your fairy tales of all women on the planet unanimously and suddenly deciding to not to have any children at all, ever.