NYT Headline “Did Women Ruin the Workplace?”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read the article. Obviously, women should be treated as equals, etc, but I think it is worth asking questions about whether many of feminism's achievements have actually improved things for women. Arguably, women now have to do everything a man has to do, in addition to everything that women do, and it doesn't seem like this is a good deal. Men are miserable, women report the lowest levels of happiness in decades, and yet we can't question whether this is all working for us.

I think the answer is that men should do more. I mean, people can decide what’s best for them, but if you have two people working then you can’t rely on one of them for most other tasks, too.

It's not even just the tasks. It's all the planning and organizing that they somehow can't see and do not help with. My husband and I split most chores evenly. For example, we switch off weeks of meal planning and cooking meals. So it's split 50:50, and he is quite proud of himself for this. But he seems to think a magical elf manages the pantry and restocks to cooking oil and seasonings, who cleans out the fridge and scrubs the shelves, who wipes down the counters and mops the floor, etc. But if you ask him, he does half the work of feeding our family.

Stop patting yourself on the back. He probably does things that you don't even notice or register either.

Yeah, we had that dynamic. For a while I used to do all kinds of things around the house. I realized my wife didn't care. In the middle of remodeling the bathroom, "But there are dishes to do, take my trash out."

I think she realizes this was a mistake now, because I just quit doing those things.

She also has very poor "house skills", like even making a bed or making sure the house has good towels or other home goods. She's realized how annoying that is also and has gotten somewhat better at that.

She also realized she doesn't want a career and only works a part time job, mostly show she can nominally pay for preschool, so she doesn't have to watch the kids. This is annoying. I mean my income alone keeps in the middle class, but we could be doing much better, but now she expects me to run the kids around in addition to making my job much more of a priority.

Your post drips with condescension. Truly indicates what you feel in your head. So...your wife is poor at "house skills"....how good are you at birthing kids? Or being pregnant? I would consider those house skills. Either way, I'm glad that she "has gotten somewhat better at that". I hope you trained her how to fold the sheets just so. I am glad you are not my husband because then I would have been a divorcee.

Your post makes me better understand why men are getting less interested in marriage. His wife doesn't contribute equally to the household. That sucks regardless of gender.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a woman that had a kid then went in leave for 6 months, came back for 6 months and is going out again because she is having a other kid. Who knows when she will be back a full year.

But, I thought MAGA wanted women to have more kids, and have them younger.

Yeah MAGA doesn’t want women to work.

No, MAGA wants families to make decisions that work for them and stop putting pressure on women to become Girl Bosses if their actual nature is more domestic.

People throw a lot of shade at SAHMs. I've never been a SAHM but I find it completely disgusting that feminism has set up a two tier system with SAHMs as the underclass that aren't quite meeting the mark. Women being a lot to the table outside of a paycheck and the left has no issue disparaging capitalism except in the context of feminism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read the article. Obviously, women should be treated as equals, etc, but I think it is worth asking questions about whether many of feminism's achievements have actually improved things for women. Arguably, women now have to do everything a man has to do, in addition to everything that women do, and it doesn't seem like this is a good deal. Men are miserable, women report the lowest levels of happiness in decades, and yet we can't question whether this is all working for us.

You’re right! Women would be so much happier without their own money and bank accounts (which they got in 1974). (Sarcasm clearly)

Men are unhappy because they must function as adults without a servant at home to wait on them. They also feel this way about slavery, which is why white supremacy is openly discussed and platformed.

Women are unhappy because there is a serious backlash going on! Although there are a collection of lazy dumb women who are ok with trad wife life and being subservient. Most are not.

Where did this myth about bank accounts come from? it is complete BS.

Regarding credit cards, it was a mixed bag. Single women could get credit cards but it was much harder than single men. This was fixed under a 1974 law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a woman that had a kid then went in leave for 6 months, came back for 6 months and is going out again because she is having a other kid. Who knows when she will be back a full year.

But, I thought MAGA wanted women to have more kids, and have them younger.

Yeah MAGA doesn’t want women to work.

No, MAGA wants families to make decisions that work for them and stop putting pressure on women to become Girl Bosses if their actual nature is more domestic.

People throw a lot of shade at SAHMs. I've never been a SAHM but I find it completely disgusting that feminism has set up a two tier system with SAHMs as the underclass that aren't quite meeting the mark. Women being a lot to the table outside of a paycheck and the left has no issue disparaging capitalism except in the context of feminism.

Who pays for them if their nature 'is more domestic' if their husband divorces them or dies? Hey, I wouldn't work either if I didn't have to worry about begging after my alimony, if any, ran out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a woman that had a kid then went in leave for 6 months, came back for 6 months and is going out again because she is having a other kid. Who knows when she will be back a full year.

But, I thought MAGA wanted women to have more kids, and have them younger.

Yeah MAGA doesn’t want women to work.

No, MAGA wants families to make decisions that work for them and stop putting pressure on women to become Girl Bosses if their actual nature is more domestic.

People throw a lot of shade at SAHMs. I've never been a SAHM but I find it completely disgusting that feminism has set up a two tier system with SAHMs as the underclass that aren't quite meeting the mark. Women being a lot to the table outside of a paycheck and the left has no issue disparaging capitalism except in the context of feminism.

The right of MAGA has people like Hegseth who would repeal the 19th and misogynists with large followings like Fuentes, or even Charlie Kirk who condescendingly ordered Taylor Swift to "submit" to her future husband. I hope MAGAs throw shade at the ranks within their own party. Does not seem they actually believe in freedom or choice, frankly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a woman that had a kid then went in leave for 6 months, came back for 6 months and is going out again because she is having a other kid. Who knows when she will be back a full year.

But, I thought MAGA wanted women to have more kids, and have them younger.

Yeah MAGA doesn’t want women to work.

No, MAGA wants families to make decisions that work for them and stop putting pressure on women to become Girl Bosses if their actual nature is more domestic.

People throw a lot of shade at SAHMs. I've never been a SAHM but I find it completely disgusting that feminism has set up a two tier system with SAHMs as the underclass that aren't quite meeting the mark. Women being a lot to the table outside of a paycheck and the left has no issue disparaging capitalism except in the context of feminism.

I think people keep falling for straw feminist caricatures of the sort portrayed in the article, ie an overly caffeinated girlboss with pronouns who sneers at domesticity. That’s not at all what feminism is. Feminism is just the idea that women should be treated equally and have agency over their lives, whether they work for money or stay home, have kids or not, go to college or not, etc. Women should be able to choose the path they want without being pressured, fearmongered, or shamed into it. A SAHM can still be a feminist, and vice versa.

[Anonymous]

Agreed, I think you should be able to do whatever you want as long as you're not hurting anyone or shaking down others to pay your bills. This is a question for both sides: who pays the bills if the women stay home and something happens to their breadwinner?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a woman that had a kid then went in leave for 6 months, came back for 6 months and is going out again because she is having a other kid. Who knows when she will be back a full year.

But, I thought MAGA wanted women to have more kids, and have them younger.

Yeah MAGA doesn’t want women to work.

No, MAGA wants families to make decisions that work for them and stop putting pressure on women to become Girl Bosses if their actual nature is more domestic.

People throw a lot of shade at SAHMs. I've never been a SAHM but I find it completely disgusting that feminism has set up a two tier system with SAHMs as the underclass that aren't quite meeting the mark. Women being a lot to the table outside of a paycheck and the left has no issue disparaging capitalism except in the context of feminism.

I think people keep falling for straw feminist caricatures of the sort portrayed in the article, ie an overly caffeinated girlboss with pronouns who sneers at domesticity. That’s not at all what feminism is. Feminism is just the idea that women should be treated equally and have agency over their lives, whether they work for money or stay home, have kids or not, go to college or not, etc. Women should be able to choose the path they want without being pressured, fearmongered, or shamed into it. A SAHM can still be a feminist, and vice versa.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a woman that had a kid then went in leave for 6 months, came back for 6 months and is going out again because she is having a other kid. Who knows when she will be back a full year.

But, I thought MAGA wanted women to have more kids, and have them younger.

Yeah MAGA doesn’t want women to work.

No, MAGA wants families to make decisions that work for them and stop putting pressure on women to become Girl Bosses if their actual nature is more domestic.

People throw a lot of shade at SAHMs. I've never been a SAHM but I find it completely disgusting that feminism has set up a two tier system with SAHMs as the underclass that aren't quite meeting the mark. Women being a lot to the table outside of a paycheck and the left has no issue disparaging capitalism except in the context of feminism.

I think people keep falling for straw feminist caricatures of the sort portrayed in the article, ie an overly caffeinated girlboss with pronouns who sneers at domesticity. That’s not at all what feminism is. Feminism is just the idea that women should be treated equally and have agency over their lives, whether they work for money or stay home, have kids or not, go to college or not, etc. Women should be able to choose the path they want without being pressured, fearmongered, or shamed into it. A SAHM can still be a feminist, and vice versa.

+1

Sure. I don't believe the right supports this. Not when they glorify people like Charlie Kirk who did not actually support this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agreed, I think you should be able to do whatever you want as long as you're not hurting anyone or shaking down others to pay your bills. This is a question for both sides: who pays the bills if the women stay home and something happens to their breadwinner?

Obviously, when wifey is young and hot and is raising the man’s kids, she’s a good Christian woman and a model wife and mother.

When she hits middle age, kids are out of the house, and dude starts sexually harassing/banging his secretary, wifey is a lazy, worthless leech who isn’t entitled to any of HIS money after he divorces her. She should get off her lazy ass and get a job.

(Conservative women are the biggest suckers on the planet.)

[Anonymous]

What if he trades her in and the children are not out of the house yet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agreed, I think you should be able to do whatever you want as long as you're not hurting anyone or shaking down others to pay your bills. This is a question for both sides: who pays the bills if the women stay home and something happens to their breadwinner?

This has happened since humans walked the Earth. It’s not some new novel problem we need to solve for the first time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read the article. Obviously, women should be treated as equals, etc, but I think it is worth asking questions about whether many of feminism's achievements have actually improved things for women. Arguably, women now have to do everything a man has to do, in addition to everything that women do, and it doesn't seem like this is a good deal. Men are miserable, women report the lowest levels of happiness in decades, and yet we can't question whether this is all working for us.

I think the answer is that men should do more. I mean, people can decide what’s best for them, but if you have two people working then you can’t rely on one of them for most other tasks, too.

It's not even just the tasks. It's all the planning and organizing that they somehow can't see and do not help with. My husband and I split most chores evenly. For example, we switch off weeks of meal planning and cooking meals. So it's split 50:50, and he is quite proud of himself for this. But he seems to think a magical elf manages the pantry and restocks to cooking oil and seasonings, who cleans out the fridge and scrubs the shelves, who wipes down the counters and mops the floor, etc. But if you ask him, he does half the work of feeding our family.

Stop patting yourself on the back. He probably does things that you don't even notice or register either.

Yeah, we had that dynamic. For a while I used to do all kinds of things around the house. I realized my wife didn't care. In the middle of remodeling the bathroom, "But there are dishes to do, take my trash out."

I think she realizes this was a mistake now, because I just quit doing those things.

She also has very poor "house skills", like even making a bed or making sure the house has good towels or other home goods. She's realized how annoying that is also and has gotten somewhat better at that.

She also realized she doesn't want a career and only works a part time job, mostly show she can nominally pay for preschool, so she doesn't have to watch the kids. This is annoying. I mean my income alone keeps in the middle class, but we could be doing much better, but now she expects me to run the kids around in addition to making my job much more of a priority.

Your post drips with condescension. Truly indicates what you feel in your head. So...your wife is poor at "house skills"....how good are you at birthing kids? Or being pregnant? I would consider those house skills. Either way, I'm glad that she "has gotten somewhat better at that". I hope you trained her how to fold the sheets just so. I am glad you are not my husband because then I would have been a divorcee.

OMG PP, stop. You are ridiculous. Birthing is not a house skill, and while it can take a toll on the body, it's mostly temporary.

His wife just sounds lazy. But, let's be real, statistically, women do most of the house work and child care even as she also works FT.

Not enough men are keeping up with women. We carry and birth the kids; we work; we clean the house; we take care of the children; we cook. Men might not be able to birth the children but they can do everything else.

25-30% of women who birth children suffer LIFELONG pelvic floor issues in the aftermath including chronic pain, inability to enjoy intercourse, repeat organ prolapse, urinary and fecal incontinence, etc.

How nice for you that you’re in the 70-75% who don’t, but it’s not nothing when that many women are suffering these issues for DECADES.

Sounds like we women aren’t particularly great at birthing either, as you put, if you want to talk about our injuries. But even with the injuries, kids and houses have to be taken care of. Someone’s got to do it, probably the person without paid employment.

[Anonymous]

^^ I know - taxpayers pay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What if he trades her in and the children are not out of the house yet?

They’re f—k her and f—k dem kids.