NYT Headline “Did Women Ruin the Workplace?”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.)

And probably the ones requiring SNAP and housing assistance.

[Anonymous]

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.

So, I'm supposed to buy and shop for everything in the house and pay every bill. Towels to food?

Ladies....this is the sign of a true narcissist take note. He is so "superior" and wonderful in all he does and his little wife is just such a mess

[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.

You sound like a loony MAGA

[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.

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.

MAGA does not want freedom of choice. They want white christian men to be in charge of everything and the little women to be subservient. The women who blindly vote for this MAGA nonsense are punching themselves in the face.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.)

And probably the ones requiring SNAP and housing assistance.

A lot more people are going to require SNAP benefits in the Project 2025 wet dream as we’ll go back to sole providers. When there are no labor standards, disability from work means that family has no $$ coming in. But, that’s survival of the fittest.

[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’ve been a SAHM and know tons of others who are or have been at one point. All voting Dem — easily.

I think that’s your own conservative projection. Or maybe you’re just mad and want to screw women?

[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 am as liberal as they come and don't throw shade at SAHMs. My closest neighbor is a SAHM but we joke about how I WAH and am basically a SAHM that earns a paycheck. She has it goooood. I do 90-95% of what she does and I work. My DH works as Fed more than 40 hours a week and doesnt get overtime. Her husband gets 1.5 for over 40 because he has a union job.
What you are missing is that the job my neighbor's husband has- a police officer- has many protections: a full pension (he will retire at 45), great benefits, overtime pay, etc. Those have been stripped from most jobs. It's a hard gig to SAHM unless you live in rural America (VLCOL), have family money, or have a high-earning spouse.
SAHMs are not the underclass because of working women. You are the underclass because most SAHMs cater to their tax-avoidant husbands who vote Republican who opine on the domestic life but dont actually structurally support raising children as valuable. You are chattel to them as group. Not to your individual husbands of course but the other faceless women are numbers to them. And, truth be told, you are also competition. Getting women out of the workforce is a benefit to them in more ways than just having women at home.