Posted On: Monday - November 16th 2020 8:19PM MST
In Topics:   Feminism  Economics
(Continued from Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4 and Part 5.)
It's been another 3 weeks, but Peak Stupidity will fisk this whole article, come hell of high water. This one gets to the meat of the feminist stupidity in Miss Chabeli Carrazanna's compendium of feminist complaints, America's first female recession, so I foresee a less boring post than Part 5.
A caring crisisCould it be that men and women were somehow created differently, perhaps? I guess if we can't even admit anymore that we have different body parts, among certain crowds these days, it's even harder to state the truth that men and women have different roles in raising children. I seem to still read about the women being more nurturing, though, when that's important to the narrative. But when it comes to being like men and taking over their world, we can't admit this.
For women, in particular, hopes of climbing back out of this recession will hinge on one key, lingering question: What happens to the future of childcare?
The realities of the lopsided division of care inside American households has been on full display since work left the office and entered the home — for those who kept their jobs, anyway. Women in 2020 still take on the overwhelming majority of child care responsibilities, spending 40 percent more time watching their children than fathers in couples in which the parents are married and working full time, according to a study by economists at Northwestern University.
If I'm doing my higher math correctly, that "40% more" means that men are still watching the children for 42% of the time they are being watched. That's a considerable amount, and more than was the case in the old days. The old way was simpler. We didn't watch them. We told them to get outside and come in by suppertime. By then, the caring Mom had made a nice home-cooked meal, and the whole family was happier.
Still "caring crisis" is definitely a thing. I'm having a real hard time giving a shit right now about whatever this woman's been bitching about for 6 Peak Stupidity posts now.
Then child care facilities started closing by the thousands. Since January, 1 in 4 child care providers have lost their jobs and as many as half of all child care slots could be lost with centers closing, according to a study by the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank.This may sound like a vicious cycle here with layoff from other jobs causing women to not have the money for daycare, causing these mostly impersonal babysitting facilities to close, causing layoffs at the daycare centers themselves. To me, it's a virtuous cycle. If they are not working, why wouldn't mothers want to take care of their children themselves? The women at the daycare centers could spend the time at home taking care of their own kids rather than others'. Face it, women like to take care of the little ones. It's what they are made for. I don't understand the good in these complicated arrangements that end up with less parental love for the children.
During a regular recession, women may have entered the labor force to supplement their partners’ lost hours; in this recession, with the child care safety net gone, that option is not even available.
When the layoffs started, Diana Niermann remembers some parents cried telling her they were out of a job and would have to pull their kids from daycare. Her Portland, Ore. facility, called the Kozy Kids Enrichment Center, closed on Friday the 13th in March — a bad omen if she ever saw one, she thought then.
An infusion of nearly $160,000 in a loan from the Paycheck Protection Program helped keep her from shutting down permanently, but the money was drained quickly to pay her staff, rent and to bring her facility to coronavirus regulation standards so she could reopen in June.That's $160,000 of those breadwinners' (mostly men) tax money in government cheese. Her staff got months of paid time off. Then there's those coronavirus regulations. Who are the more hysterical ones about this Kung Flu crap, I ask you? I have a number of data points, some of them pretty close to home, very close ...
Of the 92 children Kozy Kids served pre-coronavirus, 17 came back. Much of Niermann’s staff, discouraged by future prospects in the child care industry, didn’t return either. Her director quit on re-opening day.She "was like" a lot of things. I'd rather not have this lady like talking to my kids like all day.
“I kept thinking in the beginning I was like, ‘Well maybe I’m not supposed to do this,’ but I’ve been through so much that I was like, ‘I’m not giving up, this is what I’ve done my whole life. This is what I believe in: good, quality care,’” Niermann said. “Child care doesn’t pay very much. We need to switch that.”
Oh, and "We need to change that."? Now, there's that free-market talk for ya'. Who is this "we" again, Kemo-Niermann? Try raising your prices. Ooops, though, you might see how many families decide this whole "have it all" lifestyle doesn't pay. Or, you can just keep even more kids with even less attention paid to them. Figure it out, or if you can't make it in business, GTFO and stay home and do something more useful for your own family.
So much of the reason behind that are policies that have often overlooked the needs of working women, said Heather McCulloch founder and executive director of Closing the Women’s Wealth Gap, an initiative working to advance policies that build women’s wealth.Let me get this straight: Women have been getting shortchanged because they are undervalued. Even with Affirmative Action all over the place, "the economy" has been screwing over these poor women. If women are thse "economic drivers", why have middle-class wages been stagnating for 50 years now? Besides the immigration aspect, discussed in Part 4, the labor supply has been increased due to so many women in it.
“We don’t recognize women’s roles and so we never ask, ‘Do women benefit?’ McCulloch said. “We completely ignore or undervalue the role that women are playing, not just in their own families as breadwinners, but also as economic drivers of the economy. If women don’t benefit, the policies need to change because we’re all going to lose.”
"We are all going to lose." If losing means going back to those bad old days of the conservative nuclear families of the 1950s, well I'm telling you, I'll never get sick of all that #LOSING.
It looks like 2, maybe 3 max., posts on this will finish the job. It's been a fun task, but a long one, as this Chabeli Carrazanna provides the virtual mother load of feminist stupidity.