[extropy-chat] change of topic

[Samantha Atkins]

On Jan 11, 2005, at 8:16 PM, MB wrote:

>
> IMHO having children is a full time job. For somebody. Dad or mom or a
> combination of the two.

Well, no, it isn't and hasn't been during most of human history.  Of 
course we used to put the little ones to work with us  as soon as they 
were able to do anything useful.     We used to teach a bit more 
responsibility a bit earlier.

But don't get me wrong.  I do agree that it requires a lot of work and 
more than a few sacrifices.  But it does not require full-time 
oversight by one or the other parental unit 24/7.

In the old days when mom (usually mom) stayed home she wasn't exactly 
just or even primarily minding the little ones.   Households in the 
fifties and earlier took a LOT of work and even then it took a fair 
amount of ingenuity to make ends meet.    It is a fairly recent 
phenomenon requiring more than a little in the way of modern gadgetry 
that we even can think of a stay home parent as doing so primarily for 
the sake of the children.    My mom was a fulltime housewife.   Largely 
we kids were set to various chores and for the rest of the time told to 
go outside and play and get out from underfoot so she could do her 
manifold tasks in piece and maybe have some moments to herself.    It 
was not some idyllic for-the-kids-sake scene by any means.

>
> Yes, it is lovely that women have freedom to work now outside the
> home, it is a fine and good thing.
>
> It is an excellent thing that fathers can take time to be home with
> children - that they do not have to work all the time.
>
> However, this is a consumer society, Olga - you've complained about
> it before, as have I. IMHO if one has a child one has taken on a
> commitment that lasts for at least 18 years, and there may need to be
> sacrifices made to honor that commitment. Financial sacrifices, even.
>

One's career is not up for sacrifice just because one becomes a parent. 
  Not an option unless full time parenting/housekeeping is a career one 
prefers for a time.


> If one is not willing to make the sacrifices then perhaps one
> shouldn't be having kids.
>

There is a big difference between necessary sacrifices and costs and 
what some view as necessary to satisfy their preferred model of how it 
should be.

> Single parents are in a particularly difficult place in this regard.
> If I'd known then what I know now, I'd have made some different
> choices. Children do benefit from two parents. Hell, *parents* benefit
> from two parents. That's because parenting is a full time job. For
> somebody.

Kids benefit from two parents and having a live-in spouse/mate makes a 
lot better assuming compatibility and so on.   OK.  But I still am not 
buying that parenting is a full-time job.   It is a lot of work for 
sure.

- samantha