Conscription in Wartime & S-A-H-Parenting (aka SAHD =/= SAHM)
- Thread starter mandy123
- Start date
-
- Tags
- stay-at-home parents
@kglahoda I fail to see how someone would seek to bar either of those, even if they thought all of this were sound.
But I can see how people would seek to promote and encourage and assist mothers in being more present and involved in their children's lives. For example: redirecting corporate incentive packages and tax-subsided programs away from paternity leave and toward more maternity leave; or away from after-school childcare and toward workplace flexibility for mothers ... It would inform how best to allocate resources to yield the greatest benefit to children.
But I can see how people would seek to promote and encourage and assist mothers in being more present and involved in their children's lives. For example: redirecting corporate incentive packages and tax-subsided programs away from paternity leave and toward more maternity leave; or away from after-school childcare and toward workplace flexibility for mothers ... It would inform how best to allocate resources to yield the greatest benefit to children.
@mandy123
Okay, so you’re saying you would support those initiatives based on the belief that mothers are biologically designed to take care of children? (or however you want to phrase it, the gist being that mothers = better caretakers to their children—I’m not going to nitpick phrasing.) I just want to make sure we’re aligned.
Okay, so you’re saying you would support those initiatives based on the belief that mothers are biologically designed to take care of children? (or however you want to phrase it, the gist being that mothers = better caretakers to their children—I’m not going to nitpick phrasing.) I just want to make sure we’re aligned.
@kglahoda Well,
if we agreed there are good and sound reasons to believe that ["mothers = better caretakers" or something to that effect],
then I would support initiatives to make it easier, more effective, and more appealing for mothers to care for their children (e.g. reducing burdens and barriers and discouragement).
if we agreed there are good and sound reasons to believe that ["mothers = better caretakers" or something to that effect],
then I would support initiatives to make it easier, more effective, and more appealing for mothers to care for their children (e.g. reducing burdens and barriers and discouragement).
@mandy123 Wait, I’m confused. Are you making an argument that there’s a biological element to modern military careers..?
Or are you saying it’s a social thing? Like we’ve been socially conditioned to say “boys fight in wars, girls raise babies?”
Sorry, you have a list of things you aren’t saying, but I’m really not clear on what you are saying, lol.
Or are you saying it’s a social thing? Like we’ve been socially conditioned to say “boys fight in wars, girls raise babies?”
Sorry, you have a list of things you aren’t saying, but I’m really not clear on what you are saying, lol.
@mandy123 I’m sorry, it really doesn’t clarify. You’re presenting a lot of opinions as absolute fact and framing your questions and conclusions around them.
It’s like coming into a cleaning sub and going, “we all agree that lard is the best cleaning solution, so why are people still using windex?”
It’s like coming into a cleaning sub and going, “we all agree that lard is the best cleaning solution, so why are people still using windex?”
@kglahoda Ok. It would be truly helpful if you could pinpoint the premise or assumption that you believe is false.
I’m not trying to smuggle in any opinions or absolutes.
But I honestly don’t know what foundational premise or assumption I’m taking for granted that you would deny, and that would negate my logic if it were false.
I’m not trying to smuggle in any opinions or absolutes.
But I honestly don’t know what foundational premise or assumption I’m taking for granted that you would deny, and that would negate my logic if it were false.
@mandy123
Yeah. That’s the first step in critical thinking and being able to understand different points of view. I’m not trying to be an asshole. I’m genuinely trying to help you get something out of this post, because a lot of people aren’t engaging with you.
As to why that is, I think it’s because historically, people who enter a conversation with a lot of preconceived ideas about how the world works (like yourself), they aren’t actually looking for different ideas that challenge their own. They’re looking to further shore up their beliefs by either finding people who agree with them, or “winning” an argument against anyone who disagrees. Winning, in this context, usually means “I’ve set up a question based on completely flawed data. My question only has one logical conclusion if you accept the flawed premise, and if you don’t accept that premise, we can’t have a discussion.”
You might be doing that. You might not. I don’t know. I think discussion, especially in online spaces, has deteriorated significantly in the past few decades, so how people have learned to engage and discuss ideas with others has definitely suffered. Which is to say, you might be operating in completely good faith but not have the tools in order to do so, because the way you have learned to discuss ideas in this environment is from sources who don’t do a very good job of it.
I hope that doesn’t come across as condescending, because I sincerely do not mean it to be. I’m trying to provide some insight for why you might be having a tough time getting the discussion you’re looking for.
Yeah. That’s the first step in critical thinking and being able to understand different points of view. I’m not trying to be an asshole. I’m genuinely trying to help you get something out of this post, because a lot of people aren’t engaging with you.
As to why that is, I think it’s because historically, people who enter a conversation with a lot of preconceived ideas about how the world works (like yourself), they aren’t actually looking for different ideas that challenge their own. They’re looking to further shore up their beliefs by either finding people who agree with them, or “winning” an argument against anyone who disagrees. Winning, in this context, usually means “I’ve set up a question based on completely flawed data. My question only has one logical conclusion if you accept the flawed premise, and if you don’t accept that premise, we can’t have a discussion.”
You might be doing that. You might not. I don’t know. I think discussion, especially in online spaces, has deteriorated significantly in the past few decades, so how people have learned to engage and discuss ideas with others has definitely suffered. Which is to say, you might be operating in completely good faith but not have the tools in order to do so, because the way you have learned to discuss ideas in this environment is from sources who don’t do a very good job of it.
I hope that doesn’t come across as condescending, because I sincerely do not mean it to be. I’m trying to provide some insight for why you might be having a tough time getting the discussion you’re looking for.
@kglahoda I appreciate all of that.
And if I were insisting on pushing the conversation forward while outright rejecting or ignoring any challenges to my underlying premises, then I think you would be spot-on.
But I'm doing the opposite thing.
I'm saying, "hey this train of thought has been on my mind - can you help me understand how others might see this different or where my logic is flawed" ?
So I'm soliciting productive, critical feedback. I am, from the outset, "questioning everything" and asking for help doing so because I recognized I was having difficulty in the echo chamber of my own mind.
So while there might be a lot of overlap between ...
"Given A, B, and C - therefore D, right?"
and
"I've been thinking A, B, and C - is that right?"
... they're actually 180 degrees different.
And if I were insisting on pushing the conversation forward while outright rejecting or ignoring any challenges to my underlying premises, then I think you would be spot-on.
But I'm doing the opposite thing.
I'm saying, "hey this train of thought has been on my mind - can you help me understand how others might see this different or where my logic is flawed" ?
So I'm soliciting productive, critical feedback. I am, from the outset, "questioning everything" and asking for help doing so because I recognized I was having difficulty in the echo chamber of my own mind.
So while there might be a lot of overlap between ...
"Given A, B, and C - therefore D, right?"
and
"I've been thinking A, B, and C - is that right?"
... they're actually 180 degrees different.
@mandy123 4, the “caring” part of 5, and 7 are certainly the points worth evaluating.
My initial set of questions would be:
- What did men evolve to specialize in?
- What non-biological factors are impacted by that?
- Why does the non-biological specialization factor in for men caring for children, but not for women entering the workforce or military?
- Why does this all only apply to newborn/young children? (like what happens at the age of 6ish that suddenly makes men on par with women for childcare?)
- Without relying on actual studies, how can we separate what is evolutionary and what is due to societal pressure and norms?
My initial set of questions would be:
- What did men evolve to specialize in?
- What non-biological factors are impacted by that?
- Why does the non-biological specialization factor in for men caring for children, but not for women entering the workforce or military?
- Why does this all only apply to newborn/young children? (like what happens at the age of 6ish that suddenly makes men on par with women for childcare?)
- Without relying on actual studies, how can we separate what is evolutionary and what is due to societal pressure and norms?
childofthelight
New member
@mandy123 are you capable of even imagining how disconnected and rare it is to have a culture/country that is both supportive/promotive of SAHDs while also have an even moderately militant culture??? i'm thinking this is uniquely american. other countries, progressive enough to even entertain the thought of SAHDs, at best only have essential investments in a military apparatus.