Our discussions here have forced me to rethink some government policies as well as some activism issues I thought I used to agree with... but I'm no longer certain.
Well for sure, I've never agreed with straight up baby bonuses, and even less with this decade's baby bonuses, because us Western women have vastly reduced our fecundity.
But what about daycare and the many other child/parent services that "we" are constantly fighting "for"? Is government subsidised daycare not a breeding subsidy as well? I've known so many single moms who bred in complete cognizance that this baby would be raised by government subsidised daycare while they head off to work.
Our governments are selling breeding subsidies to citizens under the guise of producing more labour for our never ending corporate greed and production megalomania, pretending we need women to 'produce' more in order to make our economy 'produce' more... for the wealthy of course! Way to place the burden on women!
Breeding, taxes, subsidies, all reeks of womb rental to me, women as producers, I've come to hate the very idea.
If the government wants cheap labour, it should not be by subsiding breeding.
I used to associate universal access to daycare (Canada) as an issue of freedom for women, improved economic independence, from a feminist standpoint, from a healthcare standpoint... but I now only see the breeding aspect :(
I am a member of a feminist group for the first time in my life this year... and subsidised breeding is certainly something I'm talking about with the other members.
Indeed, recent forms of feminism have become more 'representative' or 'inclusive' after several years of backlash from anti-feminists, so the feminist movement has been 'adapting' and 'evolving' in response to that backlash. My purpose in the feminist group is to act upon feminism's initial ideals of rendering women bodies and minds free from coercion of all forms, economic coercion no exception.
Only one of our 6 members of the board has children, and she's constantly wining about her time constraints... blah.
Yea, feminism... giving all women the freedom to become a housewife instead of being forced to become a housewife! WOOOO! FEMINISM!
No different than people choosing to be slaves in D/s relationships...
Are you against "breeding subsidies" in the hope that fewer women will have children? Or that women with children will not work and therefore not contribute to corporate production?
I can see the confusion. I don't want to have children, but "career" isn't liberating for most people.
In the "Gen X" article on the other thread, the woman said that she had a second child while knowing all about the problems she faced with the first. So for people who really want to breed (or uneducated people who get pregnant and don't want/can't acquire abortion) the obstacles aren't going to stop them, and stopping assistance might just end up making life more difficult for the kids, who didn't ask to be born.
Indeed, that has been one of the drawbacks of 'modern' feminism, to place so much of a social wager on assuming that women would find more satisfaction being bossed around by some megalomaniac in a corporation, rather than being one's own boss at home.
Personally, over 50% of my life has been devoted to neither... I have chosen the life of a modern self described beatnik... but it's just another choice, not a final truth... but at least the feminist movement did get me that choice. But once people procreate, most choices get eliminated. I like having my options open.