What’s the implied (final) solution to this extremely concerning situation, bucko? peterson-pain

    • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I really do mean this non-rhetorically: what do these bazinga chuds propose about his “concerning!!” issue? It sure as shit isn’t material aid for women.

      • BeamBrain [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Consider that capitalists view workers as, essentially, livestock and you will get your answer (this is also why I believe veganism and socialism are linked)

        • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          3 months ago

          Look out, we got a live one in this thread. If you look at his “both sides” comments and read between the lines, you can see how much he’s salivating for that aforementioned livestock. kombucha-disgust

          • BeamBrain [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            25
            ·
            3 months ago

            The old-school r/cth energy is always at its strongest whenever a conservative dipshit wanders in, lol

            Hexbearites are siblings. We will constantly antagonize each other over the dumbest shit but if someone from outside comes after any of us, we unleash our fury as one

        • BeamBrain [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          42
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          conservatives […] support organizations that provide essential supplies and care to pregnant women and mothers

          lmao no they don’t, conservatives have spent decades systemically dismantling every form of assistance for mothers. Their credo is “there is no such thing as society” and if you can’t afford to raise your kid then fuck you, that’s your problem not theirs, pull yourself up by your bootstraps

        • GrouchyGrouse [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          ·
          3 months ago

          Who does that economic “boost” benefit? Because we’re sitting on 40 years of neoliberal policy that has squeezed the working class to achieve it and the benefits sure as shit haven’t trickled down. I’d say that’s enough time to draw conclusions from the data.

    • imogen_underscore [it/its, she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      you can’t pay women to have kids. not saying you’re doing this but a lot of the time when this gets brought up on here male leftists love to go on as if material supports will make women go back to being broodmares. it’s a reactionary and essentialist view. when women are afforded more reproductive rights and general freedoms to choose their own way in life, they have less kids. it’s not a purely economic issue.

      • Collatz_problem [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        3 months ago

        It is primarily economic issue but not in that sense. Subsistence farmers tend to have a lot of kids, because each kid expands labour power of the family, improving the quality of life of all its members. In industrialized urban society each kid is a drain on family’s resources for the next 20 years and family’s quality of life plummets, and then capitalism makes it even worse. We know that even in medieval times birth rates in cities were atrocious, despite minimal women’s rights.

      • TerminalEncounter [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 months ago

        I bet people would have more children with more equitable ways of actually raising them, instead of the ol’ dumping all reproductive labour - unpaid - on women. Money for domestic housewives was a thing they used to talk about in feminist circles in the 70s, more as a thought exercise, but there really is something there. By that I mean the crying out for justice and equitability and liberation not that we should just pay people with uteruses to pop out babies lol

        • loathsome dongeater@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          3 months ago

          I agree with this. Having access to more public resources related to raising a child, and maybe if families were structured so that other family members other than the parents could help, it would make raising a child less daunting. Still won’t be easy but I am sure people would be more receptive to having children.

          In the current situation, if you are a parent living in an isolated nuclear family having to work long hours you are fucked. Raising a child becomes extremely difficult. I found /r/regretfulparents a while back and seems like 90% of the posts are complaining about having no help, including from their husband most of the time.

          • TerminalEncounter [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yeah sometimes divorcing a husband can actually lead to LESS work and higher quality of life because of how little said husband was doing before, just adding mess and being another mouth to feed

      • NPa [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 months ago

        there’s probably a healthy middle ground between “all women should be permanently pregnant” and “no kids ever”. Like, building a world where we can sustainably support the continuation of humankind, while also leaving room for people wanting to go childless or have a big family, is not the same as wanting to control who gets how many children. We also have to think about the fact that the last few hundred years have been very chaotic and rapidly changing and it’s very hard to determine where the “”“natural”“” ( I know natural is not a thing really) birthrate should be in the context of a normal, non fucked society existing in a cooperative global environment because we haven’t seen one of those yet.