Family life sucks

[Anonymous]

Toronto too. Very difficult to get hired if a woman is late 20s and married. Employers assume you will be missing for 12 mos a pop for each kid you have. Who wants that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to stay with my sister for a week to help out as she just had her second child. I don’t have any kids yet, but honestly it seemed like her life is hellish. As is a lot of my friends in the same phase of life. They have high friction relationships with their partners, are trying to juggle too much on their own, and are squeezed financially.

It made me wonder if there’s something wrong with how we do the family thing America. Is there a better way? Or is this just life for a lot people with kids?

Yes! There is a better way. We need to stop expecting moms to do it all. Go to work and also be the mom from the 1950's. During WWII the government had daycares because women were needed when men went to war. They closed them when men came back.

To be fair, there are times where family life is really bad like after the birth of children so it isn't a fair snapshot of life. Like if you came over when you were puking every 20 minutes you would think life isn't worth living but, miss the sunsets.

Most mom's don't do it all if they are married. Many fathers do half or more.

Lol.
What planet are you in? Pls show us the data and video proof clips. I may wanna move there!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that the early years are HARD but now with my two children -- 1 college aged and one just-graduated college -- it is pretty sweet. Sure, there are significant costs involved at this phase, but these two kids of ours are developing into amazing young adults and it is a privilege to have front row seats. Yes, there are prior years of "hard" but the long-term payoff is better than I had imagined.

Yeah, but it doesn't always work out this way. My stepson is in college and is having significant mental health / failure to launch issues. His older brother graduated and now spends all day in his childhood bedroom sleeping and playing video games. Both are super smart but have ADHD etc and got very mixed grades and have trouble finding work.

Yikes.

And up to 2 sets of parents/ step parents and up to 4 sets of grandparents allowed this to happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: didn’t have a village and realized too late I was married to a hunter type who wanted to go off to get meat for weeks at a time. He also had some characteristics that would have probably gotten him killed off in a farm or factory accident 100 years ago, or shot dead on the frontier 150 years ago.

This will sound harsh but along with the isolation of modern life, modernity has also allowed the survival of some characteristics and genes that otherwise wouldn’t make it to reproduction and family life and caregiving duties even a couple generations ago. Only in a society focused on academic achievement and computer-based white collar work could my exDH have made it to the point of meeting me, let alone marrying and having a child.

I think back to my grandparents cousin’s and some random great uncles when I was very small and they were kind of off in their own exile and always had been, and no one expected much from them. Back then there was room for these types to just do their thing and survive at a low-level pensioned job or in a cottage on the back acres of a small family farm. Now there’s a lot more pressure to play along to find a place on society even if it’s a bad fit. (And obviously some don’t and become homeless or addicts or otherwise never find their role)

So true.
Have seen this written in here before. Our easy couch potato life of ordering takeout, remote work computer jobs, and outsourcing life skills has really created a bulge of deadweights.

I always disagree with some advocacy group claimants a super power and advancing society- to be an educated but self-centered one trick pony but constantly need others to do all basic life skills for you indefinitely.

Gross. Just marry your mother if this was her goal and intent or definition of success.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good grief. Don’t want kids, that’s fine but some of you need to call your therapist. Sorry but you sound miserable.
Life with kids can be difficult but if it is all the time, it is a you problem(exception for those with SN children- you have valid reason to complain). Just take care of what is in front of you.
I worked FT with 3 DC. It was just not that hard. Well, did I get to the gym, no. Read a book, no. Watch an adult movie in 12 years, no. But I did that through my twenties and no, mid fifties, I can go back to doing whatever I want. Putting DC before me for ~ 1/4 of my life makes me enjoy what I have now.”

Don’t have kids if it is not for you, but there are trade offs in life and I love the village I am
In.

There are so many posts like this right now I think these are trolls.

Imagine not going to the gym or reading a book for decades but thinking it’s ok. Lady you have lose standards and are more proof how awful it is to have kids.

Stop dramatizing. I ran on a trail pushing a stroller. Then I ran alongside my DC riding a bike. Then I played tennis and soccer with them at the park. I read storybooks cuddled up together in bed. I played with dolls or built Legos in lieu of movies. It is a trade off, but a better one IMO.
And now- we all go to the gym and adult movies together.

Martyr mommy is in the house!

No, not a martyr at all. Just responding to someone who felt that not going to the gym or reading a book was traumatic.

Not reading a book for 12 years is horrific. I don’t suggest sharing that in real life:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good grief. Don’t want kids, that’s fine but some of you need to call your therapist. Sorry but you sound miserable.
Life with kids can be difficult but if it is all the time, it is a you problem(exception for those with SN children- you have valid reason to complain). Just take care of what is in front of you.
I worked FT with 3 DC. It was just not that hard. Well, did I get to the gym, no. Read a book, no. Watch an adult movie in 12 years, no. But I did that through my twenties and no, mid fifties, I can go back to doing whatever I want. Putting DC before me for ~ 1/4 of my life makes me enjoy what I have now.”

Don’t have kids if it is not for you, but there are trade offs in life and I love the village I am
In.

There are so many posts like this right now I think these are trolls.

Imagine not going to the gym or reading a book for decades but thinking it’s ok. Lady you have lose standards and are more proof how awful it is to have kids.

You are the product of the individualistic culture in America. Me, me, me, me.
You are going to regret your choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Baby stage is hard. The reward outweighs the temporary discomfort of life stages. When you age into your elder years you will understand the value of investing into your family. The issue is Americans lack family values.

I have found this too. I am wondering what sort of mechanism would enable community and help reinforce family values, but is not a religious institution? I have honestly thought of joining one just for the community and values (give or take a few of 'em), but it doesn't feel right as we are not religious.

I am religion adverse. We joined scouting. It has been great - a lot of character development, leadership, outdoor activities… We also volunteered as registered leaders and had a lot of influence on what they were doing. Kids made great friends. And have had a lot of great experiences. Both earned Eagle.
There is a duty to God in scouting. You cannot be an atheist, but all you need to do is believe in a higher power, so it doesn’t need to be an organized religion. Our higher power is Mother Nature.
Be aware, each pack and troop is different. They all follow the same core program, but may implement differently. Example, some troops want scouts to put scouting above other activities like sports. Other troops are really flexible and happy to have them join activities whenever they can. Some focus on more challenging backpacking trips, others mix it up and might do a STEM trip one month, canoe the next, then visit Gettysburg.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good grief. Don’t want kids, that’s fine but some of you need to call your therapist. Sorry but you sound miserable.
Life with kids can be difficult but if it is all the time, it is a you problem(exception for those with SN children- you have valid reason to complain). Just take care of what is in front of you.
I worked FT with 3 DC. It was just not that hard. Well, did I get to the gym, no. Read a book, no. Watch an adult movie in 12 years, no. But I did that through my twenties and no, mid fifties, I can go back to doing whatever I want. Putting DC before me for ~ 1/4 of my life makes me enjoy what I have now.”

Don’t have kids if it is not for you, but there are trade offs in life and I love the village I am
In.

There are so many posts like this right now I think these are trolls.

Imagine not going to the gym or reading a book for decades but thinking it’s ok. Lady you have lose standards and are more proof how awful it is to have kids.

You are the product of the individualistic culture in America. Me, me, me, me.
You are going to regret your choices.

I’m going to regret reading a book??

[Anonymous]

^^ above is why women aren’t having kids. Someone is criticized as selfish for reading a book while having kids.

See, most people don’t envision a life where they go decade not allowed to read a book or do anything for themselves because they had kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The newborn and toddler years are really hard. And we live in a society with few family support policies (daycare costs a lot, housing costs a lot, maternity leave is typically unpaid).

These are some reasons the birth rate is falling.

For me, parenthood has been wonderful and so worth it for the love and fulfillment. There have been a lot of hard days. But the joy and beauty outweigh them.

Perhaps it could be because wages are higher here and housing costs lower (and homes generally larger), but birth rates are falling across all western countries. Generous paid leave is inversely correlated with the birth rate.

My unpopular opinion is that government leave makes it worse. In most European countries, the paid leave is at a low wage (similar to unemployment here) and women are expected to take it. This means every woman who has a kid is expected to stay home for a long period of time to earn low wages from the government. Women still have to work, especially since wages are generally lower, but they are second class citizens at work since it’s assumed they are away for years having children.

Do I want to have another kid and instead of working earn $300 a week? No thanks.

It's not just western countries. It's all developed/industrialized countries (except Israel).

I like the Nordic model for parental leave, which offers equal bonding time for fathers, but fathers have to take the leave separately from the mothers. It encourages dads to be primary caregivers early in their child's life. And it seems to be working based on research on time spent parenting by gender.

And they also aren’t having enough kids. Not only do the women have to suffer, but now the men too. Having children means you’re kept from working.

The Norwegian model is especially suffocating. Long, required parental leaves. Most jobs are uninspiring due to the oil money. Very average salaries. Not outsourcing anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to stay with my sister for a week to help out as she just had her second child. I don’t have any kids yet, but honestly it seemed like her life is hellish. As is a lot of my friends in the same phase of life. They have high friction relationships with their partners, are trying to juggle too much on their own, and are squeezed financially.

It made me wonder if there’s something wrong with how we do the family thing America. Is there a better way? Or is this just life for a lot people with kids?

Yes! There is a better way. We need to stop expecting moms to do it all. Go to work and also be the mom from the 1950's. During WWII the government had daycares because women were needed when men went to war. They closed them when men came back.

To be fair, there are times where family life is really bad like after the birth of children so it isn't a fair snapshot of life. Like if you came over when you were puking every 20 minutes you would think life isn't worth living but, miss the sunsets.

Most mom's don't do it all if they are married. Many fathers do half or more.

Lol.
What planet are you in? Pls show us the data and video proof clips. I may wanna move there!

Planet Earth.
You and your man should join us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The newborn and toddler years are really hard. And we live in a society with few family support policies (daycare costs a lot, housing costs a lot, maternity leave is typically unpaid).

These are some reasons the birth rate is falling.

For me, parenthood has been wonderful and so worth it for the love and fulfillment. There have been a lot of hard days. But the joy and beauty outweigh them.

Perhaps it could be because wages are higher here and housing costs lower (and homes generally larger), but birth rates are falling across all western countries. Generous paid leave is inversely correlated with the birth rate.

My unpopular opinion is that government leave makes it worse. In most European countries, the paid leave is at a low wage (similar to unemployment here) and women are expected to take it. This means every woman who has a kid is expected to stay home for a long period of time to earn low wages from the government. Women still have to work, especially since wages are generally lower, but they are second class citizens at work since it’s assumed they are away for years having children.

Do I want to have another kid and instead of working earn $300 a week? No thanks.

It's not just western countries. It's all developed/industrialized countries (except Israel).

I like the Nordic model for parental leave, which offers equal bonding time for fathers, but fathers have to take the leave separately from the mothers. It encourages dads to be primary caregivers early in their child's life. And it seems to be working based on research on time spent parenting by gender.

And they also aren’t having enough kids. Not only do the women have to suffer, but now the men too. Having children means you’re kept from working.

The Norwegian model is especially suffocating. Long, required parental leaves. Most jobs are uninspiring due to the oil money. Very average salaries. Not outsourcing anything.

This is the new manosphere talking point to justify men not doing their part to parent their own children. "Why should we have to suffer too? Wahhhh"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The newborn and toddler years are really hard. And we live in a society with few family support policies (daycare costs a lot, housing costs a lot, maternity leave is typically unpaid).

These are some reasons the birth rate is falling.

For me, parenthood has been wonderful and so worth it for the love and fulfillment. There have been a lot of hard days. But the joy and beauty outweigh them.

Perhaps it could be because wages are higher here and housing costs lower (and homes generally larger), but birth rates are falling across all western countries. Generous paid leave is inversely correlated with the birth rate.

My unpopular opinion is that government leave makes it worse. In most European countries, the paid leave is at a low wage (similar to unemployment here) and women are expected to take it. This means every woman who has a kid is expected to stay home for a long period of time to earn low wages from the government. Women still have to work, especially since wages are generally lower, but they are second class citizens at work since it’s assumed they are away for years having children.

Do I want to have another kid and instead of working earn $300 a week? No thanks.

It's not just western countries. It's all developed/industrialized countries (except Israel).

I like the Nordic model for parental leave, which offers equal bonding time for fathers, but fathers have to take the leave separately from the mothers. It encourages dads to be primary caregivers early in their child's life. And it seems to be working based on research on time spent parenting by gender.

And they also aren’t having enough kids. Not only do the women have to suffer, but now the men too. Having children means you’re kept from working.

The Norwegian model is especially suffocating. Long, required parental leaves. Most jobs are uninspiring due to the oil money. Very average salaries. Not outsourcing anything.

Should someone cry for the men who are “forced” to take PAID parental leave?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The newborn and toddler years are really hard. And we live in a society with few family support policies (daycare costs a lot, housing costs a lot, maternity leave is typically unpaid).

These are some reasons the birth rate is falling.

For me, parenthood has been wonderful and so worth it for the love and fulfillment. There have been a lot of hard days. But the joy and beauty outweigh them.

Perhaps it could be because wages are higher here and housing costs lower (and homes generally larger), but birth rates are falling across all western countries. Generous paid leave is inversely correlated with the birth rate.

My unpopular opinion is that government leave makes it worse. In most European countries, the paid leave is at a low wage (similar to unemployment here) and women are expected to take it. This means every woman who has a kid is expected to stay home for a long period of time to earn low wages from the government. Women still have to work, especially since wages are generally lower, but they are second class citizens at work since it’s assumed they are away for years having children.

Do I want to have another kid and instead of working earn $300 a week? No thanks.

It's not just western countries. It's all developed/industrialized countries (except Israel).

I like the Nordic model for parental leave, which offers equal bonding time for fathers, but fathers have to take the leave separately from the mothers. It encourages dads to be primary caregivers early in their child's life. And it seems to be working based on research on time spent parenting by gender.

And they also aren’t having enough kids. Not only do the women have to suffer, but now the men too. Having children means you’re kept from working.

The Norwegian model is especially suffocating. Long, required parental leaves. Most jobs are uninspiring due to the oil money. Very average salaries. Not outsourcing anything.

No one's forced to take leave. It's just that the father can't "give" their parental leave to the mother. It's use it or lose it.

https://pub.norden.org/temanord2025-547/parental-leave-in-norway.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The newborn and toddler years are really hard. And we live in a society with few family support policies (daycare costs a lot, housing costs a lot, maternity leave is typically unpaid).

These are some reasons the birth rate is falling.

For me, parenthood has been wonderful and so worth it for the love and fulfillment. There have been a lot of hard days. But the joy and beauty outweigh them.

Perhaps it could be because wages are higher here and housing costs lower (and homes generally larger), but birth rates are falling across all western countries. Generous paid leave is inversely correlated with the birth rate.

My unpopular opinion is that government leave makes it worse. In most European countries, the paid leave is at a low wage (similar to unemployment here) and women are expected to take it. This means every woman who has a kid is expected to stay home for a long period of time to earn low wages from the government. Women still have to work, especially since wages are generally lower, but they are second class citizens at work since it’s assumed they are away for years having children.

Do I want to have another kid and instead of working earn $300 a week? No thanks.

It's not just western countries. It's all developed/industrialized countries (except Israel).

I like the Nordic model for parental leave, which offers equal bonding time for fathers, but fathers have to take the leave separately from the mothers. It encourages dads to be primary caregivers early in their child's life. And it seems to be working based on research on time spent parenting by gender.

And they also aren’t having enough kids. Not only do the women have to suffer, but now the men too. Having children means you’re kept from working.

The Norwegian model is especially suffocating. Long, required parental leaves. Most jobs are uninspiring due to the oil money. Very average salaries. Not outsourcing anything.

Should someone cry for the men who are “forced” to take PAID parental leave?

Not cry. You’re missing the point. Preventing men from going to work after having a baby isn’t a way to increase the birth rate. It does the opposite.