Rogue1-and-a-half posted:There's one here that no person in their right mind can argue against and that's Bradley Smith; Holocaust denial is repugnant.
Rogue1-and-a-half posted:I'm not sure it should be a criminal offense, as it is in Europe. The nature of 'free speech' necessitates our allowing people like Smith to walk free, but that doesn't mean we have to listen to him or even like it. I believe in freedom of speech; Smith is one of those individuals that makes you question that principle, however briefly.
Rogue1-and-a-half posted:Mailer's championing of Jack Abbott was a particularly idiotic move, but as I've read none of his books, I refuse to comment on whether or not he's screwing up America.
Rogue1-and-a-half posted:As for Hirshman, I don't like feminists who argue women shouldn't stay home with their kids. Studies seem to indicate that this is better than daycare
Rogue1-and-a-half posted:and, after all, I thought feminism was about giving women the choice. If they choose to stay home, that's still their choice.
Rogue1-and-a-half posted:some people claim to speak for God and say very unhealthy and very hateful things. No reason to blame God for that; blame the people themselves.
Darth Geist posted:One thing to consider, diz, when choosing whether or not to have a parent stay home, is that daycare is freaking expensive. Almost expensive enough to offset that second income, in some cases.
Lowbacca_1977 posted:I think looking at it purely economically shifts the feminist focus.
Lowbacca_1977 posted:If its really that they just look at everything and judge it as how financially beneficial it is, feminists would support men making more than women because there isn't the risk of maternity leave.
Lowbacca_1977 posted:The issue of day care is not a purely financial one, and I've personally not heard feminist arguements rely on economics to justify women working vs women raising kids.
Rogue1-and-a-half posted:I'm aware that it's a gross oversimplification of feminism to say it's about the choice; there are after all femnists who literally believe men should be slowly breeded out of the human race. In other words, it's a crap shoot; feminism is as scattered as any label is. I suppose my statement would be more accurate if I said that in my opinion, feminism is at its best when it is about the woman's choice.
Rogue1-and-a-half posted:And frankly I find all this talk of psychoanalysis and being taught to want things rather disingenuous. If you want it, you want it; doesn't matter why you want it.
Rogue1-and-a-half posted:I suppose there are equally women who work outside the home who want to work outside the home for reasons I would term unhealthy;
Rogue1-and-a-half posted:In other words, the patriarchial society has given us both women who are willing to submit and women who form their indentities in sharp reaction and rejection of those patriarchial mores.
Rogue1-and-a-half posted:That said, your arguments regarding two parents working are somewhat sound; the emphasis here is on the education of the parents; because if you're able to afford a quality daycare, as opposed to the cheapest rate one on the corner, then, sure, one can argue for it as not particularly harmful. But this is manifestly not the case for middle to lower class; trust me, I know, they put their kids wherever they can (in my personal experience) and the kids have little to no supervision by adults.
Rogue1-and-a-half posted:If you can afford to put them in a daycare where they'll receive decent treatment and even a little (gasp) affection (which I'm shocked to see is not on your list of things necessary for raising a healthy child) then perhaps things even out.
Rogue1-and-a-half posted:diz, I think we're meeting in the middle again. We've got to stop doing that. Damn that reasonable discourse! [quote=Rogue1-and-a-half]I can certainly understand your points; I was being a bit overly zealous in my remarks about psychoanalysis not being important regarding peoples wants. I think that, as you say, there are arguments to be made for both sides; and both sides, I would say, have a measure of truth to them. I suppose there's a line in their somewhere that absolutely divides the issue, but I'm not sure where; at what point we let people's desires hold sway and at what point we try to actively change their desires. Somewhere, we cross over, but as I say, no clue where exactly.
Rogue1-and-a-half posted:As to your comments about people wanting to work out for 'unhealthy' reasons, yes, I would occasionally describe men as 'unhealthy' in their desire for work; I'm not a misogynist.
Rogue1-and-a-half posted:I term it, as you say, as workaholic syndrome, as well as working for a degree of financial gain that is purely, um, how to say, selfish? (loaded word, I know, especially economically). I suppose I'm talking about those people who let their kids go hungry so they can have a nice car (in principle) . . . I term that kind of reason for working outside the home 'unhealthy' no matter who's doing it.
