Oh dear. A split.

[Redlake]

Kellie Jay ranting against feminists.

@timeisnotaline

When was having babies and women’s functions ever including men? In various societies men weren’t allowed to see women on their period, men weren’t allowed at the birth, often men weren’t expected to appear at all, ever pick up a baby etc. it’s always been that way. This dads are parents too for the roughly under 8s seems pretty recent (& thank goodness we have that now).

Thing is it's really difficult to discuss when the parameters keep changing!

The above is your initial post. Dads, babies nope, not seen as parent to baby before they were about 8yo.

Latest post it's babies only, and of course dads loved, cared about, enjoyed them etc.
And comments are about mothers doing the bulk of looking after the baby.

I've been responding to what your posts said. And tbh I said right at beginning, really good to be sure what your posts are saying as don't want to get cross purposes.

Thing is generally when you replied, you changed the parameters, and then said you couldn't understand why I thought as I did, given the (altered) situation.

How can I be expected to answer based on your post after I answered?

Sorry to be so blunt. The experience of being expected to know what you meant before you told me, and then getting irritation when I failed to take into account things you hadn't said yet.

It's really hard!

Maybe start again?

I can answer more about the men invisible point if you would like.

And also happy to continue talking about male humans and babies, making sure we both understand what we're talking about!

That ok with you?

Ok, I am trying to say that dads weren’t required at births, weren’t required as practical parents, and that yes I agree they provided amusement and fun times which is different (aka ‘Disney dad’). They were frequently absent either for long days or longer periods of weeks or months so barely present or not present at all. I’m not arguing they didn’t love their children, but their active role in their children’s life often didn’t include doing anything for them beyond entertainment, providing financially/materially and teaching male adult skills. It’s very different from today’s expectation; while you say today’s expectations are much lower of dads I think they are much higher. I honestly think I have made that fairly clear in following posts so I don’t feel I need to reply further. I don’t see any examples from you of today’s expectations of dads/men being lower, re your starting post of it’s now moved from being about families/couples to To anything to do with having babies and raising children, it's just women. The men have been written out pretty much entirely!

I'll do my best to make my posts a bit clearer, noted your comment and I know I go on a bit!

Two points there.

1. The second thing you mention is about general attitudes around children.

I think there has been a massive societal shift around the whole area. And I think it's happened relatively fast. Last 20 years maybe. I'm sure others will disagree, it's just something I noticed.

Up till recently, the general societal view about children was that they were important for society as a whole, and vulnerable because reliant on others when young.

General view was responsibility for feeding, looking after, protecting from harm etc. Was with the parents. The father and the mother both contributed to that responsibility to their child/ren. If they couldn't, or wouldn't, do those things for their child/ren.Then society should step in and make sure kids got basics.

(That idea of family mum dad roles etc. It was a Victorian ideal. Not real life for most. But many Victorian ideals settled in society and have persisted).

Last 20 years or so has changed enormously IMO.

• Anything to do with, or related in any way to children. Is the sole responsibility of the mother.
• In society, the group that wants children, is women. Specifically, women who are in the age range to have a baby. They are the ones that want children, choose to have a baby. It's only to do with them. No one else.

Then it goes: -Having babies is not compulsory. If a woman has kids, and fails to ensure she as an individual has calculated money, taken into account any and all future possibilities etc... If she ends up struggling. That's on her. She made a bad choice. Her responsibility.

Then onto things I've seen a lot like.

• Women who struggle, having failed to predict the future, well it was their choice and they made the wrong choice. Should never have had kids. Her choice, her responsibility.

• It's selfish/ reckless/ environmentally damaging/ a luxury... Etc. For any woman to have a baby. You did it anyway. Just because you wanted to. Help? You're having a laugh.

• Why the hell should I pay for someone else's kids??!!

And so on.

Imo this is a major shift and a really concerning one.

That applies to trans people. But that hasn't stopped people from trying to demonize trans people collectively.

Hello Razzli

It's a long thread, which post / point applies to trans people? There's so many different topics and opinions been posted.

I think you could make a general statement that in most societies women have been the main carers of small children, and as boy children came to a certain age they came more into the care of fathers.

I think that was a largely entirely practical division of labour. Women were more tied down with being pregnant and breastfeeding, so the care of small kids and staying closer to home also made sense for them. While very heavy and dangerous jobs, or those that took people away from home for long periods, have tended to fall to men. Some jobs of course included everyone and people had to make do in some instances too, but that's a general pattern.

TBH I have a hard time seeing that as anything other than wholly practical.

The poster who started this conversation was posting about raising babies/ children, all over the world and for all human history.

That's the context and so that's what I'm thinking about, don't want more cross purposes!

Given that, Santa just checking is that what your post is based on? Don't want to end up talking about different things (again!).

I think more is expected out of men today in terms of childcare out of practical necessity as well.

People used to live in joint families or have extended family members live very close by. In parts of the world, this is still the case.
Childcare is something that is predominantly carried out by all the female members of the family. A woman will have her mother, sisters, aunts, female cousins etc around to turn to for advice and help. This is/was a very valuable network. Men don't really get involved except in general play or teaching children skills as they get older.

With nuclear families becoming the norm and more isolated as people move away from their home towns and cities, women are cut off from the other women they would usually have relied on for advice and help. Which is probably why there's more pressure on men these days to lend a hand otherwise it's pretty impossible for a woman to do it all on her own (and plenty men still don't bother to lift a finger).

So yes, it's a good thing that men are more involved in childcare, but it's more of an inevitable and pragmatic result of family structures being fragmented over time.
A bit sad that mothers have lost the invaluable network of female family members that helped take the stress and pressure of childcare.

Some cultures still try to find ways to maintain this support network for mothers but the pressures of capitalism make it harder with time.

Good point Nonny

Another issue is the cost of housing. Previous posters have raised it too but I don't think it can be said too often.

I think the era of women having a genuine choice about going back to work lasted the blink of an eye. I probably caught the tail end of it as I had my child in the late 90s, when childcare was an established thing and just before the housing market went crazy. There was an assumption that I would go back but part time work was a real option because we didn't have a huge mortgage and so living on 1and-a- half salaries was affordable.

Looking back, I think I was very fortunate and I really feel for young colleagues now who look at you gone out if you talk about reducing hours or taking a career break.

Both men and women are expected to do more of the things that used to be seen as not their role. (As ever the stereotypes never reflected the actual picture).

Men home children
Women work

Irl in plenty couples seems men step up a bit ish with home kids.
Women widely ending up doing most or all home kids, plus working.
Widely studied and definite phenomenon.

I know this is an old thread, but I'm trying to understand what you mean....what kind of unrelated females are you thinking of? Do you think non-bio lesbian mothers are a danger to kids?

What about fathers & mothers who use sperm or egg donors? Are they more dangerous as not biologically related? Oddly I can find v little research on thus....

Arthur Labinjo-Hughes- his Dad and step mum were found guilty of killing the six-year-old about a fortnight before that comment.

Star Hobson who's mum's new partner Savannah Brockhill was instrumental to the child's death was also in 2021 I think.

This thread is so old it’s almost like an archaeological dig!

Oh no...stepmother's yes can also be dangerous....I see the context now, thanks.

Generally I think non bio lesbian mums & dads who use sperm donors etc are safer bc they commit to the child before birth, but there seems to have been little study.