Feminists pushed for women to be able to work because being totally financially dependent on and beholden to One Singular Man was extremely dangerous and quite literally killing women.
Capitalism gets worse but being able have and keep your own money is ideal over being totally financially dependent on One Man.
People who are anti capitalist (in a general sense of the term) rightfully say that the conditions under which we work totally suck (and should change).
Misogynists see that the working conditions are awful (and they see other things happening), but rather than using that fact to push for improvements in the work place for women and people of other gender minorities, they launch back to deeply sexist and dangerous rhetoric that, beyond glorifying a past for women that never existed, doesn’t even understand the basics of child and home care that SAHMs have to go through.
So now we have women who thoroughly believe that a) working sucks (theyre right in some ways) and b) the “solution” to this is for women to be SAHMs or housewives because “all you have to do” is cook and clean. They glorify the man having to go out and make all the money–money which they presume will be handed over to them if they so much as ask. Money that they don’t have real access to, money that they believe will be their compensation for fulfilling an archaic gender roles successfully. Meaning if they don’t perform to the man’s standards, they lose the money.
All day. Every day. It’s very clear that the women who say this often do not, themselves, have to do all the cooking and cleaning for other people, and the fact that they think this is simple and easy work shows they devalue the real labor that goes into being a SAHM/housewife. I’ve done cooking and cleaning for a household of five people and I will tell you it’s awful.
But these traditionalists and hypergamists and whatever else they wanna call themselves are leading people into believing that ultimately, it’s men that should be in control of everything. Women not having to work is somehow a good thing.
!!! EXACTLY!
My grandmother always used to give me old family jewelry items for Christmas and birthdays and I hated it. I liked the gesture, but it was so not my style and they always just ended up sitting in the safe, I never wear any of it. And she always asks after them, do you still have that ring, how about those earrings. I thought it was because she was mad I wasn’t wearing them.
But then sometime in high school, I realized what she was gifting me was capital. Things not meant to be worn necessarily but kept. Things I could easily liquify as assets. Because when she divorced my grandfather, she was not legally allowed to have her own bank account or be on her own lease. All her assets diverted to her male family members. And the only reason she had somewhere to live was by their discretion and permission.
She gave me those items because that’s how she communicates love and sees it as a form of caregiving. In her world, when she was my age, having jewelry meant having the ability to go down to the pawn shop so you can leave an abusive boyfriend or fend off collections another month or feed your kids. And I think about that every time a new law comes up that’s attacking everyone who is not a cis man.
I will say I get the vibe that a lot of peoples interest and support for strikers is a bit too much for a vicarious ‘burn it down’ thrill, rather than for the actual goals of a strike.
Like UPS has agreed to come back to the table and it is very possible they will concede to Union demands and avert a strike. And if that happens (so long as the union does not make concessions on its key demands) it’s a good thing. It’s a victory for the laborers. It is the same ultimate conclusion that a strike would intend to produce except without the workers having to go on (not so great) strike pay for a week or two.
Getting what you want without having to strike is sort of like getting someone you’re suing to settle. It allows you to get what you want with a lot less pain and financial sacrifice. The other party also benefits for the same reasons (not to mention saving face), but that in no way diminishes your victory. Sometimes the threat of fighting back is enough to get the powers that be to back down–thats a good thing
my brother started calling our cat “doobie brother” which he then lengthened to “dubious brother” and has since morphed into “brother dubious” like he’s some sort of fucked up little monk
brother dubious
“My liege, I’m afraid I have reason to believe your concubine plots against you. Worry not, your eminence, you can still trust me, of course…”
“I cannot make speeches, Emma…If I loved you less, I might be able to talk about it more. But you know what I am. You hear nothing but truth from me. I have blamed you, and lectured you, and you have borne it as no other woman in England would have borne it.”
