Yeah seriously. We're Catholic (the crazy kind who eschew birth control and have tons of babies). We live in the SF area and are moving to Portland and plan on buying in the city. We have lots of friends in SF who have large enough families (3 - 8 kids). These are not super wealthy people. Well, I mean, they save their money and spend wisely so they have enough. They are not hotshot doctors, lawyers, or software engineers. Many are construction workers and other 'blue-collar' jobs, with wives who stay at home, and lots of kids. The difference is that they see their vocation as having and providing for children, and my other colleagues at work... do not.
Most also own a home, that they bought... by saving money. They do not come from privileged backgrounds, and at least one family immigrated to this country.
The problem is that we live in a highly materialistic and consumerist society. Indeed, the paradox where poor families have more children than those with means like middle and upper middle class families is unique to consumerist societies. The reason should be clear. Having the extra income relative to the poor, many prioritize spending what they've made on goods and services that contribute to their comfort, pleasure, and "status" (keeping up with the Jones') over children who often require sacrificing comfort and pleasure. Having children is no longer seen as a demanding privilege, but a pointless burden.
Now, nothing is wrong with material goods as such. Nothing is wrong with sacrificing having children for the sake of a higher goal (as a Catholic, you already understand that to be something people can do, e.g., the priesthood or the religious life). But a society that has traded the privilege of raising a new generation in not for superior goods but for inferior goods, for the sake of empty self-indulgence, surely smacks of malaise and decadence. Is it any wonder why so many of us are depressed when we celebrate a perverted form of individualism that is ultimately self-destructive? We have a nature and this recent fad that denies human nature or perverts it will not produce happiness.
Not sure subjugating women to be home makers is going to win a lot support for your point. The problem is that there is no support in the U.S. for working couples who choose to move away from family for economic opportunity.
I would not describe these women as 'subjugated'. First of all, most can work if they choose, because they are all college educated. In at least one family I know, the wife is college educated and capable of earning more than her husband. They just choose not to, and their families take whatever hit that means. I mean, I tell my wife all the time she should work if she feels like it (she is a software engineer actually, and, for when she was working, a quite well paid one I might add), but she doesn't want too, and that's okay by me. I also don't want to work, because it'd be more fun to be with babies all day and make more of them. Ultimately, the most precious gift you can give a child is both their parents at home most of the time, but in the absence of that, having one parent home is good.
I don't mean that out of some disdain for families who cannot do that. My own parents (immigrants to this country) could not, and I wish they could have, and I am happy we can pull this off. To be fair, they made up for it by accepting jobs that let them be home more. Like my dad refused promotions so he could be home with his children more often, and my mom became a teacher to spend more time with us. The value of such a gift is incredibly understated in modern society, as is the joy of children.
> The problem is that there is no support in the U.S. for working couples who choose to move away from family for economic opportunity.
There is a lot more than their ever was (governmentally at least), and people are not having children. The issue is we've abandoned all community institutions, but this is due to the aggregate choices of many people, not a social policy, IMO. Speaking of the families I was talking about, we rely on each other for many things you'd rely on family for, like babysitting.
> I also don't want to work, because it'd be more fun to be with babies all day and make more of them.
I mean, this is just not true, you know. Being with babies whole day every day is not fun for overwhelming majority of adults, neither male nor female. They may see meaning in it, but like, fun it is not. And it definitely is not easy fun when you are on fourth or fifth baby, meaning care about siblings too.
Also, managing both 5 kids and full time job would be pretty hard even if good daycare is available. Your "she can go to work because she has college" completely ignores logistics of it and expectations on software engineers these days.
Can you explain how OP‘s wife is subjugated? I’m ex Microsoft. My wife is a better programmer than you and me put together. She stays at home with the children voluntarily. I told her if she wanted to switch places, I would stay at home with the children. Is she subjugated? Would I be subjugated if I stayed at home instead?
It's the obnoxious, upper middle class hyperfeminist careerist rhetoric that we've been taught to believe. Funny, Chesterton once wrote that he found the feminist clamoring for women in the workplace rather intriguing. Most people, most men, perform rather boring and menial jobs. Why a woman would trade the privilege of raising her kids, shaping the future generation of mankind, for 8+ hours of twisting screws and hammering nails, he could not say. The reason the men were doing it was primarily to support their families.
This isn't to argue that women should be barred from working. It is merely to emphasize that this rather vicious characterization of women who raise their own children as "oppressed" or "subjugated" has the very real potential to amuse those women who are confident enough in having chosen their children over their careers.
Some women want roles other than those historically performed by men. They are not subjugated. The ideal for women should not to be indistinguishable from men.
Most also own a home, that they bought... by saving money. They do not come from privileged backgrounds, and at least one family immigrated to this country.