To wonder why men hate women so much?

[YouAreNotBatman]

Violence againt women, sexual harrasment.

Controlling women bodies.

Women’s sexuality: frigid prude if you don’t want sex, slut if you.

Porn, sex ”work”.

All the MRA’s, mgtow, incels etc.

Even historically speaking they have no reason to be angry at women, women never had any power, mostly tried to accommodate to men’s demand/ wants, I think it still goes on.

Many women still tip toe the line to placate men.

What reason do they have to be so angry at women?

@Idontwanna

I suppose its easy to fear how Ken react when you've made yourself entirely reliant on one

Well, if you are in that situation you tend to find support from others in the same boat. At least, that is my experience. I am not sure if you are saying neither parent should be allowed to stay at home after their child is 1, or if you are just saying it isn't usually possible. I am only saying that I think it would be good if society gave parents more flexibility to be a SAHP, if they chose. Also, that I don't think women should attack other women for their choice either to stay at home or work. I believe in solidarity amongst women.

@gnilliwdog

No one is being attacked.

Most solidarity seems to disappear when it comes to women choosing to work.

And you don't appear to be saying it would be good if society supported sahp, you're saying sahms.

You seem to have forgotten dads exist.

There already is lots of flexibility and support for women who don't want to work.

I honestly don’t think that most women want equality in the workplace, not once they’ve had children at least. They want a man who earns more than them to allow them to work part time or SAH. I think if all couples worked roughly the same hours (be that FT or PT) and shared the childcare/house work/Life admin then a lot of people would be much happier. With Dad’s much more involved in their kids day to day and not just coming home to do bedtime and be the cool parent. We’re not much further than the 1950s in that respect, apart from women adding a part time job into their childcare/house work in order to pay for housing. Men need to step up, I’m not saying they don’t but the division of labour is never going to be equal if women work fewer hours. Plus a lot of women I know are control freaks about how their kids/house are looked after.

The other massive issue here is porn. Hideous, revolting porn. It’s ruining men. Maybe I was lucky but when I was in that stage of my life, boys/men who I slept with never pressured me into anything and I mean long term relationships and one night stands. From talking to my younger friends, they are asked for all sorts of things from every man they date with and are made to feel like prudes if they don’t want to do things. In my teens-twenties not one man asked to choke me during sex. It seems that’s the norm these days and it’s terrifying.

I removed him from a mainstream setting, which all sides now agree was essential, and he now has complex PTSD as a direct result of that KS1 placement and can attend no school. The only placements possible for kids such as mine cost £100,000 plus a taxi there and back, which as they tend to be out of area costs around here £50,000. Those schools cater to extremely challenging kids who have been multiply excluded, or kids with low learning ability. My son is anxious, gentle and has massive sensory processing problems, and his reports say he should never be in a class of more than 6 kids. So where would he go?

I'm an (unpaid, so won't count, right?) advocate for parents locally and we are swamped with parents being told they have to wait a year for a place. All the while, their child's at home. With complex needs. Expensive to meet complex needs. And these are kids whose needs can be met in such schools.

In your world, what do we do? Social care won't provide support. The only way to get a school placement - which these parents are doing - is to Appeal to a Tribunal which are currently booking hearings into next May. There's Judicial Review, which is hugely costly (in theory you can get legal aid, but in actuality no education lawyers with legal aid contracts are taking cases on right now, so no, you can't).

Kids are complicated. Life is complicated. When you grow up a little, you'll probably learn this.

There is no value in being a sahm to society that any other parenting choice couldn't also achieve

I dont know why sahms have to insist on being valued by society.

Or tbh what that has to do with the op

@perfectstorm

What does any of that have to do with sahms benefitting society?

@Topgub Actually, I used the term SAHP in my pp. As in, it would be good if parents of either sex had the flexibility to stay at home with children if they wish. I most certainly have never attacked women who want to work, but people on this thread have definitely attacked women who want to stay at home. I work from home and support my family as a lone parent, so I have no axe to grind. Just do not think women should criticise other women for their choices.

@gnilliwdog

Well thats ridiculous

Lots of choices are worth criticism. That remains true even when women make them

I dont see saying being a sahm has no value to wider society as an attack.

So how does it work?

The LA pay me to educate him, agreeing no school at all can do it. In law, they can't agree to me doing it if there is any school that can, and his EOTAS was ordered by a judge. So yes: no school. Fact.

Agencies providing what I do cost £100,000 a year plus. Often more. My son's package is £45,000. So you think I should work while an agency profits from the taxpayer, costing vastly more, while offering my son less, yes?

Why?

You can sidestep and restate things you now know are not true or you can seek to engage - preferably with a modicum of integrity and intelligence.

What would a better option be? NO school - LA and judge agreed. Agency costing vastly more, and offering my child much less. Again, all sides agreed.

Yet you feel society would benefit more were I to return to work and allow an agency to educate my child with a rolling sequence of professionals, rather than my doing it to what all sides agree is a very high standard? When he is recovering, and improving, and making great gains, and the aim is in fact to enable him to return full time to the lone possible school, within a year?

A lot of women locally are in this situation. It's a lot less unusual than you probably realise - the difference is the EOTAS, which is that funded educational package, and that package is why I can hope that my son can return to a school.

What is the preferable alternative? If what we are doing is wrong, what should we be doing, instead?

what are the parenting choices have you got in mind exactly ? That you think would compete equally with the person most invested physiologically in psychology in the welfare well-being and survival of the child.

because I can tell you having worked in summer camp childcare settings along time ago none of the childcare providers give a shit if your kids lives or dies, they’d be sorry for about 24 hours but they’ve get over it quite quickly. I saw children with dairy allergies given dairy on a regular basis luckily without consequences and a bit of a oooops moment but kids have died in those scenarios.

@Nothappyatwork

What does that have to do with benefitting society?

You could argue it benefits your child (I wouldnt) but how does it benefit society?

I've asked a couple of times but no one has answered.

Men not feel like they just exist to be used in the workplace to provide jobs for women.

you actually know more than one man who thinks like this? Bizarre.

Considering it is HER majesty's government in the UK, aren't all those male civil servants just leeching off a woman? Shouldn't they have set up their own systems? Lazy gits.

I am one. What I do clearly does. And there are lots of other women I know in the exact same situation.

Kids left in mainstream schools end up in PRUs and SEMH placements. Those cost hideous amounts, and all too often those kids end up in YOIs and then prisons - or on benefits and in need of MH support for life.

I appreciate that these are outlier situations. But they're also far more common than most seem to realise. 10% of kids is not a low number, and that's just the neurodiverse. Disability is a lot broader than that.

I think anyone caring for kids, actually, benefits society. And I don't see that it matters if it's a parent or a loving and engaged paid childcarer. What I do think is that the contempt shown for anyone performing labour linked to women's reproduction is inherently misogynist - as, too, is the effort to force women to do nothing but that labour.

I'm not interested in replicating a male-dominated society, where all that shuffles are the women despised for caring roles. That's what they have in the USA as far as I can see - no paid maternity leave and no abortion rights now, either. How about we respect reproductive and caring labour, while respecting that nobody should be confined to it?

@perfectstorm if you're paid to care for your son that's a bloody job

Not to be conflated with being a SAHM

Ffs

Someone has to look after a child. That someone is almost always a woman.

I object to anyone saying that childcare doesn't benefit society, because it's clearly untrue. That is SAHP and childcare worker alike.

I also agree that this is a bit of a derail.

I agree that society is hideously misogynist, our rights painfully recently won, and that things are getting worse, and not better, at the moment.

@perfectstorm

think anyone caring for kids, actually, benefits society.

Well, yes. So why should we value the sahm role specifically?

Is it more worthy than what working parents do?

Being a carer is different to being a sahm.

How about we respect reproductive and caring labour

I'm not sure what you mean by reproductive labour.

I do respect caring labour. I just dont agree its women's work.

Men should be doing as much caring labour as women do.

It's expenses. I have to have a separate account, which is then audited by the LA to ensure none benefits me directly. It's OT, SLT, psych, lessons, transport, IT.

It's unpaid.

Any more attempts to sidestep? Or are you done, now?

@perfectstorm

No one said childcare didn't benefit society though.

Childcare does.

Childcare is provided by all sorts of people. Not just sahms

Whats being questioned is what benefit sah mums specifically have to society as a whole. Not their individual children or families

Weird how a thread about the wrong doings of men has turned into women being in the wrong and attacking each other.

Even more ironically, it's men (overall) who truly benefit, be in from the labour in the home or at work and also from the shift in focus.

We stopped talking about porn,rape,abuse,violence,control ,sexism ,discrimination and instead we're focusing on exactly how little value does a poster have (or not).

It's fucking bonkers!

Then we're probably on the same page.

(And reproductive labour is why we need paid maternity leave - which they do not have in many countries, including the USA).

I don't see the pay as what makes childcare valuable to society. I see it as caring for the next generation. But I do appreciate the point that with parent carers, it's not a choice (a friend is a consultant haematologist and having to give up work altogether because she has 2 disabled kids, too - that is in no way a choice and if she could afford the level of SEN nanny she would need, which on their income they couldn't, and living hundreds of miles outside London none at the right calibre would work for them anyway).

I just wish that some women wouldn't try to blame systemic misogyny, which has been created and baked in through millennia, on other women's childcare choices. Talk about doing the work of the patriarchy for them.

Wow.

@perfectstorm

This whole conversation started because a woman said women would be better off sticking to being sahms (who should be valued more) and leaving the clever men alone (parahrase)

I think you're directing your annoyance in the wrong direction.

However, there is no denying that where it is a choice, chosing to be a sahm impacts societal equality in a negative way.

And yes that choice is impacted by systemic mysoginy.

But until we make men take as much responsibility for childcare as women do, little will change

@perfectstorm Yes, I think it is misogyny to devalue the care of children, to say that their emotional wellbeing has no effect on society as a whole. It's misogyny to assume that it it women's work and therefore of no value. A loving father could do the same nurturing but this thread assumes that it is always the mother and therefore has no value. It's misogyny to assume that a woman should be more like a man by getting back to work and finding childcare. If caring for children is useless to society what sort of adults are we going to turn out? As @Nothappyatwork points out, a carer on a low wage, under difficult working conditions, with no relation to your child, just does not have the motivation to do a better job than a capable parent.