Foreign Policy Shifts?

[Flash]

To be clear, I'm not putting too much of an onus. I'm just discussing the social studies that have been introduced. As I said, there's both truths and holes in both sides to the debate.

Contrast that with studies that show parents in general, to include mothers, prefer to work even if it leaves them too little time with family.

 

[Flash]

Both men and women should have 'societal pressure to marry and start a family.' It's a core function of life, and necessary to continue the survival humanity. That's the point - that feminism has demonized this.

The paradox about 'feminism' is the complete rejection of being a woman instead of empowering it. That is making a lot of young men 'nope' out of long-term relationships.

Do you know what feminism is? Because what you are describing really ain't it, just some of the more extreme offshoots.

Children born to married parents have significantly better academic and professional outcomes, on average. There is also a wide chasm between 'encourage' and 'force.'

That's great, but there are a lot of folks who go too far and oppose families that aren't 'traditional' relationships both morally and policy-wise.

Um, okay... I don't think Mike Huckabee is commenting in this thread, so simmer down now.

Politicians and religious leaders who loudly champion 'traditional families' and restrictive/discriminatory policies but lead lives that are anything but are not limited to former governors turned ambassadors but are a significant and influential part of politics in this country nowadays. To claim otherwise is to be willfully ignorant.

 

[SteveHolt!!!]

Allow me to rephrase:

The difference in time spent doing household chores among working men and working women is not that large.

Anything that says otherwise is from biased organizations like "Gender Equity Police."

Since the data you presented does actually show women spending more time doing household activities, I guess we’ll just have to debate the meaning of “not that large.” There’s probably some really interesting questions we could ask about why women who work work less hours and those hours are replaced by unpaid labor at home. We should find some smart scientists to look into that. I’m going to guess they’re not going to find “Men are actually better at chores because they’re stronger.” I wonder if they’ve looked at such gems as “those studies don’t count all my manly things like lawn work and house repair” (spoiler alert: they have!).

As for the second sentence, I applaud your consistency with your intellectual stance of “anyone who disagrees with my preconceived notions is biased and not worthy of consideration.”

 

[Gatordev]

I think a lot of what you're describing is an effect of the "everyone goes to college, including your Mom" mindset, and devaluing the trades.

I disagree. What I'm describing is people are starting to raise their hands with concern about what can happen in the future (basically a generation or two away).

but what about the underemployment of working-age people and the skills training gap?

In short, I think a lot of those skills could be filled by incentivizing our existing population to the right vocations- which might be a good basis for national domestic policy.

And there I agree, but that's a "today" problem.

My overall point is what I posted about was the rising concern about the future, where you are talking about the very real problem of today. Both are obviously important.

 

[sevenhelmet]

I disagree. What I'm describing is people are starting to raise their hands with concern about what can happen in the future (basically a generation or two away).





And there I agree, but that's a "today" problem.

My overall point is what I posted about was the rising concern about the future, where you are talking about the very real problem of today. Both are obviously important.

Welp, we gotta solve today's problems so we can be around to tackle tomorrow's. As a bonus, solving the "today" problem helps with the 1-2 generations down the line that has you concerned.

 

[wink]

Do you know what feminism is? Because what you are describing really ain't it, just some of the more extreme offshoots.



That's great, but there are a lot of folks who go too far and oppose families that aren't 'traditional' relationships both morally and policy-wise.



Politicians and religious leaders who loudly champion 'traditional families' and restrictive/discriminatory policies but lead lives that are anything but are not limited to former governors turned ambassadors but are a significant and influential part of politics in this country nowadays. To claim otherwise is to be willfully ignorant.

Broad brush.
As was mentioned above you, can champion family values without endorsing restrictive or discriminatory policies, and while there absolutely are hypocrites in the family values camp ( hypocrisy being a human behavior not reserved for any particular persuasion or group) the fact remains that all those who quietly adhere to those values, just don't make the news because it is not sensational or rhetorical ammunition. I for one could not say hypocritical proponents of the value of the family unit in society have more or less influence than those who honestly live out the virtues they are promoting.