I think they’re advocating that women can choose for themselves what kind of person to be, and the fact their bodies are capable of gestating new humans doesn’t obligate them to do so.
It’s sort of like how the fact a man’s body may be capable of entertaining others by dressing their penis up in a tiny coat and hat doesn’t mean we should bully an entire gender into making that the purpose of their existence, nor does it mean we’re advocating for a world without sharp dressed dicks.
Let people live their lives based on who they are, not the abilities of their genitals.
The original tweet essentially said that all women have a mission from God to use their bodies to make babies. At the very least it’s a value judgment on how women live their lives.
There seems to be a sustained campaign against having kids.
I have never encountered this. There is absolutely a sustained campaign for bodily autonomy, and for the acceptance of people who choose not to reproduce; but I haven’t encountered anyone talking like the original tweet, saying women have a mission from God to not have kids or something.
This is just fighting against the natural way of life.
Here we go again with imposing judgements on people who don’t reproduce. I feel like that’s the bigger ‘sustained campaign’ in this conversation. The natural way of life changes over time, it used to be natural to die young from a bacterial infection, or to have your village sacked by marauders. We don’t need to have the same pressures to keep reproduction high as in the past. Populations are still increasing, but people are out here blaming women for not doing it faster? Just take a breath, it’s going to be okay.
Just FYI, my wife has two masters degrees and still was able to get pregnant, give birth and help raise a child with me afterward. So apparently it is possible for women to have advanced university degrees and have kids.
Incidentally, my mother also has two masters degrees, so apparently that was also possible in the 1970s without the population crashing.
The only question I have - why advocate childlessness? U people seem to be making claims that if woman has kids - she’s automatically a baby factory and a servant.
This is mindbiggling
You introduced the idea of not wanting women to give birth in a conversation where the only thing brought up was women don’t have to give birth to be valid. Women not wanting children is as valid as women wanting children.
Another possible housewife and incubator ruined by BIG ACADEMIA.
Serious question.
Are u people advocating for humanity just dying off? Why not have kids? That’s normal::: spoiler spoiler
I think they’re advocating that women can choose for themselves what kind of person to be, and the fact their bodies are capable of gestating new humans doesn’t obligate them to do so.
It’s sort of like how the fact a man’s body may be capable of entertaining others by dressing their penis up in a tiny coat and hat doesn’t mean we should bully an entire gender into making that the purpose of their existence, nor does it mean we’re advocating for a world without sharp dressed dicks.
Let people live their lives based on who they are, not the abilities of their genitals.
Noone has to do anything.
But there seems to be a sustained campaign against having kids.
Imo This is just fighting against the natural way of life.
The original tweet essentially said that all women have a mission from God to use their bodies to make babies. At the very least it’s a value judgment on how women live their lives.
I have never encountered this. There is absolutely a sustained campaign for bodily autonomy, and for the acceptance of people who choose not to reproduce; but I haven’t encountered anyone talking like the original tweet, saying women have a mission from God to not have kids or something.
Here we go again with imposing judgements on people who don’t reproduce. I feel like that’s the bigger ‘sustained campaign’ in this conversation. The natural way of life changes over time, it used to be natural to die young from a bacterial infection, or to have your village sacked by marauders. We don’t need to have the same pressures to keep reproduction high as in the past. Populations are still increasing, but people are out here blaming women for not doing it faster? Just take a breath, it’s going to be okay.
What exactly did they say that made you draw this conclusion? I’m so curious
Just FYI, my wife has two masters degrees and still was able to get pregnant, give birth and help raise a child with me afterward. So apparently it is possible for women to have advanced university degrees and have kids.
Incidentally, my mother also has two masters degrees, so apparently that was also possible in the 1970s without the population crashing.
Nobody says it’s impossible.
And my wife has a college degree and has no impetus to work at all.
Her sister has masters and doesn’t want to work either .
Riddle me that
You seem to think suggesting women get advanced degrees means we also think people shouldn’t have babies.
Also, you seem to be making some stupid “women don’t want to work” claim which is just nonsense.
The only question I have - why advocate childlessness? U people seem to be making claims that if woman has kids - she’s automatically a baby factory and a servant.
This is mindbiggling
Nice strawman you got there. Get it on sale?
Not following
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
You introduced the idea of not wanting women to give birth in a conversation where the only thing brought up was women don’t have to give birth to be valid. Women not wanting children is as valid as women wanting children.
The straw man here is the anti-natalism.
Nope. The claim is that the tradwife is the one who thinks that.
Everyone else is saying she’s wrong.
And your stupid “women don’t want to work” implication is still stupid.
Are u denying that not all women at all want to do the day job and then take care of the kids? I’m telling u not every one at all want to do that
You do know that men can also take care of children, yes?