PDA

View Full Version : Women and the Labor Market



anova
Tuesday, October 26th, 2004, 12:13 AM
Decreasing birthrate is the result of women entering the workplace. Therefore, to compensate for the amount of women opting for career over family, should more men accept the responsibility of staying home and taking care of children?

This plan may boost birthrates.

Matamoros_
Tuesday, October 26th, 2004, 06:08 PM
Decreasing birthrates in the Western World are the result of materialism, feminist cultural indoctrination, easy access to birth control, and an overall spiritually empty world view. I doubt that the distain for even more of the dying traditional values of the patriarchal family will offset the trend.

Rey
Tuesday, October 26th, 2004, 09:24 PM
Women typically earn less than men, so most couples would probably find it more difficult to provide for any family at all if the father stayed home instead of the mother. You might be trading a higher birthrate for a lower quality of life, which I don't think is an answer.

People are just too selfish right now. Having children takes too much of *their* time. Motherhood needs to get cooled again.

Phlegethon
Wednesday, October 27th, 2004, 12:51 AM
I have no idea in which world you live.

We have massive unemployment here, so that staying home and having children is not even a theoretical option for 99% of the people.

Oriana
Wednesday, October 27th, 2004, 05:49 AM
Women typically earn less than men, so most couples would probably find it more difficult to provide for any family at all if the father stayed home instead of the mother. You might be trading a higher birthrate for a lower quality of life, which I don't think is an answer.

People are just too selfish right now. Having children takes too much of *their* time. Motherhood needs to get cooled again.In short, the very fact that women 'typically earn less than men' is a result of the family structure in which both parents hold jobs. Working mothers are more inclined than working fathers to choose lower-paying jobs with more benefits and flexibility in order to have more time to take care of their children. This would not be the case were the 'stay-at-home dad' phaenomenon more widespread, or if men rather than women chose jobs that allowed more flexibility.

It thus makes no difference whether a family has a 'stay-at-home mom' or a 'stay-at-home dad'-- and, as Phlegethon stated, under current economic conditions neither are options for many families.

This is not to mention that altering this condition would in no way impact the birth rate.

Phlegethon
Wednesday, October 27th, 2004, 11:13 AM
Huh? Chose jobs? In which world? We have an unemployment rate between 25% and 80%. There is nothing to chose. Tens of thousands of people have not had a job for well over a decade.

Rey
Wednesday, October 27th, 2004, 04:18 PM
Working mothers are more inclined than working fathers to choose lower-paying jobs with more benefits and flexibility in order to have more time to take care of their children. This would not be the case were the 'stay-at-home dad' phaenomenon more widespread, or if men rather than women chose jobs that allowed more flexibility.

I was referring to the "glass ceiling" in the workplace which feminists often complain about. You have my respect if you believe that is not an impediment to your earning potential as a woman.

Of course, a well-educated person of either gender can get a better paying job than a less-well-educated person of either gender.

Enjoy.

-Rey

Matamoros_
Wednesday, October 27th, 2004, 05:55 PM
The only real way to increase the white birthrate is to create an alternative to the nihilistic/politically correct pop culture, and augment financial incentives for larger families.

The Faroe
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 11:13 AM
Decreasing birthrate is the result of women entering the workplace. Therefore, to compensate for the amount of women opting for career over family, should more men accept the responsibility of staying home and taking care of children?

This plan may boost birthrates.Absolutely.
It is my opinion that men more than women are more to blame for the horrific birth-rates we’re witnessing. Men who won’t commit, won’t take responsibility, men without power to weather a bit of hardship, who can’t stay the course, who want to stay teenagers till they’re 45.

I’m all for more men partaking more active in the raising of children. Heaven knows, there’s a deficiency of male role models for children in a world populated by female childcare workers, teachers etc (which I feel, in large, is responsibility for the unfortunate pussyfication & bambification of European and American youths). And women in western culture have always been valued as equals of men, never the subhuman trash they’re made out to be in certain other cultures. However it has been my experience that very often the mothers are more reluctant to give up the responsibility for the children than the fathers are of assuming it. Of course this merely means the men should be more insistent.

But women in the labour market clearly have some other problems to deal with as they increasingly attain high educational and business positions, since it has been custom for women to “marry up” so to speak, socially and economically, whereas men “marry down”. This obviously is not a stable evolutionary strategy as the women on top are left without realistic chance of finding a mate (and breeding out the best and brightest hardly seems a genius move). But again it is my observation that women are more reluctant to work with this than men. A women CEO will have to be able to find happiness with a male carpenter as a male CEO always has been able to find happiness with a female secretary.

Finally there’s no getting round mother nature. The female does bear the majority of time & strain bringing children to the world. Can’t be helped.