Republican Conference Tells Young Women to Give Up Their Dreams & Their Birth Control

[laylalex 7,284]

Quote

 

Ironically, nearly all the speakers at the conference—from Owens and TPUSA’s podcast lead Alex Clark to Fox host Laura Ingraham and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.)—were invited because of their high-power, high-earning careers and massive platforms. But they spent the duration of their speeches preaching that if young women focus on professional dreams rather than marriage and childrearing, then (as Clark put it) they’re contributing to our “degenerate rotten culture.”

...

Meanwhile, Clark, who opened the conference on its first day, dedicated most of her stage-time to ill-received tangents on the supposed evils of hormonal birth control and daycare. “Who in this room has decided to ditch hormonal birth control?” she asked. After “very few hands went up,” per Peltz, Clark repeated the question: “How many of you are considering ditching hormonal birth control?” Even fewer hands.

Clark has dedicated much of her podcasting and social media activity to spreading disinformation about birth control and advocating “natural” methods that are scientifically unsound. She said at the summit that once women do have children, they should rearrange their lives to raise them on their own and avoid the supposed evils of daycare. “The feminist movement gave way to the notion that a woman could have her cake and eat it too,” Clark said, telling attendees it’s “a lie to tell women that we can have it all.”

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/republican-conference-tells-young-women-221000348.html

 

I don't disagree with one thing here -- it's a lie to tell women that we can have it all. At least with the way that our society doesn't provide enough support to working families -- whatever those families happen to look like -- to enable them to make choices about which parent or parents want to work. There's nothing wrong with a woman wanting to be a SAHM, or a man being a SAHF, just like there's nothing wrong with a parent wanting to work in addition to parenting. But the choice to be a full-time parent can be out of reach when there's not enough money to pay the bills or put healthy food in hungry bellies.

 

Access to affordable childcare and subsidies for nutrition are places to start, if politicians want to be serious about supporting families. Work and children shouldn't be an either/or proposition, and having a parent stay at home without stressing about affordability shouldn't be reserved for the wealthy. 

[TBoneTX 45,259]

One big help would be to synchronize school hours with work hours.

[Mike E 11,739]

FTA,

 

”Can you name one objective thing that has gotten better in American society since women were given the right to vote?”

 

I cannot either.

 

For a while, suffrage  did lead to improvements in civil rights and victims rights. But quotas for protected groups, expansion of protected groups, and re-definition of safety as freedom  led to: 

 

* discrimination via affirmative action (e.g. over qualified Asians cannot get slots at Ivy)

 

* trans women (aka people with prostates) now smoke people with wombs in the swimming pool, the race track, and the boxing ring

 

* more people with prostates are figuring out that by identifying as a woman in the work place, they can help their employer meet their DEI goals, get more job interviews, and lower their auto insurance

 

* people with wombs being raped by women with male genitals in venues that are off limits to men: women’s restrooms, locker rooms, prisons

 

* taking guns from women making them more vulnerable to crime

 

* unvaccinated  cannot work, travel, received medical treatment

 

* permanently sterilizing children who say they are a gender different than what was assigned at birth

 

* open borders

 

* homeless epidemic

 

* $15/hour minimum wage which just inflated costs affecting women the most. That is why child care is not affordable

 

None of above

* is good for women

* happens if women do not have the vote.

 

People with wombs are falling behind. And that is the point  Ingraham,  MTG, etc are trying to make.

 

 

 

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

We have 4 girls that work in our internet sales  department.  They all come to work and raise small children. One of the girls and her wife just had a baby. 

 

I tell them all the time I can't fathom how they do it, and how much respect I have for them. 

 

I can't imagine getting home at 630 and having to tend to children's needs until bedtime. 

 

My wife and I went to a party the other day with one of her friends and her son. They visited and chatted in their language while I engaged the boy. I am guessing he is 9 or so. It was exhausting.  Having to pay constant attention to the kid. I love the kid and he calls me uncle Bill, I just can't imagine doing it day after day non stop

[TBoneTX 45,259]

5 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

I just can't imagine doing it day after day non stop

Fatherhood is a blessing second (and not by much) only to motherhood, dude.

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

1 minute ago, TBoneTX said:

Fatherhood is a blessing second (and not by much) only to motherhood, dude.

Oh I am quite sure it is. I regret never having kids. However I thing a grandfather role I could handle. Spoil them for a bit and give them back.

Age is another big factor.  I am sure it's different when you are 30 something. 

One reason I enjoy my trips to the Philippines is I get to spoil all the young family kids

[TBoneTX 45,259]

4 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

Age is another big factor.  I am sure it's different when you are 30 something. 

Some people get a late start... and si man, it is different.

5 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

I regret never having kids.

And the world regrets that the NB Ilitrisy gene will never be passed down!  

[Dashinka 24,481]

6 hours ago, laylalex said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/republican-conference-tells-young-women-221000348.html

 

I don't disagree with one thing here -- it's a lie to tell women that we can have it all. At least with the way that our society doesn't provide enough support to working families -- whatever those families happen to look like -- to enable them to make choices about which parent or parents want to work. There's nothing wrong with a woman wanting to be a SAHM, or a man being a SAHF, just like there's nothing wrong with a parent wanting to work in addition to parenting. But the choice to be a full-time parent can be out of reach when there's not enough money to pay the bills or put healthy food in hungry bellies.

 

Access to affordable childcare and subsidies for nutrition are places to start, if politicians want to be serious about supporting families. Work and children shouldn't be an either/or proposition, and having a parent stay at home without stressing about affordability shouldn't be reserved for the wealthy. 

Why should society be the provider using money it takes from other producers?  

[LucindaLou 43]

2 hours ago, Dashinka said:

Why should society be the provider using money it takes from other producers?  

I suppose you can't have it all. Either let women decide for themselves whether they want children or not by allowing for affordable birth control, abortion, ... when a woman wants to travel that road or be willing to share the cost. And lets not kid ourselves, the finances are not necessarily the highest cost.

[Dashinka 24,481]

15 minutes ago, LucindaLou said:

I suppose you can't have it all. Either let women decide for themselves whether they want children or not by allowing for affordable birth control, abortion, ... when a woman wants to travel that road or be willing to share the cost. And lets not kid ourselves, the finances are not necessarily the highest cost.

Can’t women decide this already regardless of access to birth control?

[LucindaLou 43]

6 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Can’t women decide this already regardless of access to birth control?

Not sure that would make men all too happy 🙂

 

[Dashinka 24,481]

1 minute ago, LucindaLou said:

Not sure that would make men all too happy 🙂

 

Maybe not, but it is not really their choice, and if the Left gets its way, all men will be women.

[LucindaLou 43]

Quote

Why should society be the provider using money it takes from other producers?  

While I am somewhat of a bleeding heart liberal, it would be a sad world without men out there. Personally I would just like to see the chances evened out a bit.

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

10 hours ago, laylalex said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/republican-conference-tells-young-women-221000348.html

 

I don't disagree with one thing here -- it's a lie to tell women that we can have it all. At least with the way that our society doesn't provide enough support to working families -- whatever those families happen to look like -- to enable them to make choices about which parent or parents want to work. There's nothing wrong with a woman wanting to be a SAHM, or a man being a SAHF, just like there's nothing wrong with a parent wanting to work in addition to parenting. But the choice to be a full-time parent can be out of reach when there's not enough money to pay the bills or put healthy food in hungry bellies.

 

Access to affordable childcare and subsidies for nutrition are places to start, if politicians want to be serious about supporting families. Work and children shouldn't be an either/or proposition, and having a parent stay at home without stressing about affordability shouldn't be reserved for the wealthy. 

I really wish Republicans could go one election cycle with out saying Birth control, rape , abortion or gay.

As a slightly right of center guy I do agree with keeping all that my pronoun and sexual preferences stuff away from kids.

[Mike E 11,739]

1 hour ago, LucindaLou said:

it would be a sad world without men out there

So many jars would never be opened. This would thrill archeologists. Entire pantries of never opened food items in the ruins of homes.