It’s too men’s financial benefit to have to provide? Having to work jobs that pay what you need doing things you hate because the career you really want doesn’t pay enough to raise a kid?
I feel like you have a very one sided view of this situation. I could say the woman at home could also have time to educate herself and grow while the man could be stuck in a dead end factory job working himself to death to provide. But you just see it as the guy works more so that must mean he’s doing better. No.
And yes, there is women getting paid less for the same work. But as you even admitted, there are some men who get paid less for the same work too. But you seem to be only looking at one side of the problem.
hitmyspot@aussie.zone 1 week ago
I don’t know if you’re purposely missing the point. Some of the world’s wealthiest people are billionaire women. That doesn’t mean sexism doesn’t exist. Lots of women having high paid jobs doesn’t mean there aren’t more women than men being paid for the same work, or for similar amounts of effort.
You talk about me wing one sided while thinking women doing fully time child care would have time to study to advance their career? Lol, no.
Children take a large amount of time and resources to raise. The way society is set up, women are expected and obliged to sacrifice time, men are expected to provide resources. In the mens case, this means pressure to advance, through promotion or a higher paid role. For women the pressure is to cut down on work and responsibilities at work to the detriment of their long term career.
You talk about men having to sacrifice a preferred career ro take a better paid one. How do you think it goes for the woman’s preferred career while full time caring for kids? The end result is both parties would lose their preferred careers but in the man’s case he ends up wealthier.
Lightor@lemmy.world 1 week ago
I agree, I literally said “yes, there are women getting paid less for the same work” so I don’t know why you still think I’m missing the point. I’ve acknowledged that reality. I believe it’s you missing the point, honestly. Yes, there are tons of women who are paid more than men, it doesn’t mean there aren’t tons of men who get paid less than women too. That’s why I ended saying “We should address those struggles, all of them, and not just focus on one side.”
Lol yes. I mean, we just going to forget dads who raise children I guess.
Yes, and there are men who raise children, too.
This is a cop out. We are all adults and make our own decisions. Society isn’t forcing someone to stay home. You have a partner and you plan your life, doing what is right for you. Using what society expects as an excuse is just that, an excuse.
The mother could go back to work and the man could stay home just as easily. It is a choice made by the couple, framing it as anything else is dishonest.
Yes, wealthier. That’s the only difference? Really? Sure, with possibly years taken off his life, and miserable every day. See, that’s what I mean, you only look at it from one side. You don’t seem to even think about the reality that the man could literally be working himself to death, or that he works all day to support children he never sees, or that he forces himself to work if he’s sick or injured so the family can survive. You think “well he has more money so he’s better.” Really? A man working two jobs and knows nothing else, too tired to enjoy life, is doing worse than the stay-at-home mom raising the child and getting to see them grow? Yes, it’s still a hard job to be a stay-at-home mom, but let’s not pretend like it’s the same. Have you ever actually thought about the other side of this situation before, because it seems like you haven’t?
Either way, at the end of the day, the couple makes their own choices for them and no one else. Any societal pressures or BS like that should be shot down on both sides.
hitmyspot@aussie.zone 1 week ago
Lol, yes, as a gay man with 2 kids, I’m unable to appreciate the struggles men might have in raising children.
You seem to think we all can make choices without consequences. If women choose not to raise children and instead return to work rather than their husband, they are judged for it. If men do so,.it is seen as normal and expected.
Couple make choices but part of our choices are framed by how society is set up to allow those choices. Would more women choose to take more time with their children if they knew their career and finances would be unaffected? Would men too?
Would more children have the love and care they need if we allowed people to make the choice based on how they think the kids are best raised, rather than from financial pressure?
The crux of the matter is, how society is set up affects these choices, materially and in peer pressure to conform. As it is currently, that means women take more of the childcare burden and face financial consequences for it. Outside of childcarez they face discrimination on the basis that they MAY have children in the future. Assertive women are seen as bitchy. Assertive men are seen as go-getters. Professional women are less likely to find and marry a partner, even if they wish to, as men find it emasculating… professional men find it easier to find a partner as they are seen as accomplished. Then we have the issue of how much each role is paid and roles offering flexibility to allow child care being paid less.
Basically, the cards are stacked against them but they can choose to fight at every step. Due to the fight at every step, few advance to the upper echelons and the average woman is paid less at all levels. Sometimes for the same work, sometimes as they are overlooked for promotion to higher paying roles. Either sucks.