• Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Removing gender roles in order to more equitably distribute the workload is progressive. You can remove morality from that equation and it still works, ergo it is absolutely something we should support and there are no reasons to perpetuate backwards gender roles.

    • EfreetSK@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      to perpetuate backwards gender roles

      I never even suggested that. Where did you get that from? All I’m saying is, people in power aren’t your friends.

      Although is it a good thing that me and my wife work like crazy to keep our family going? Is this really what life is about? I’d love to be stay at home dad, yet I can’t

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 day ago

        People in power are not necessarily your enemies either, by virtue of being “in power.” Administration is a necessity in maintaining a large and complex society with intricate production methods and staggering scales of logistics. There will always be a need for administration, of some sort.

        The fact that you and your wife work incredibly hard for your family is a byproduct of a highly unequitable distribution of the products of labor. Making labor equitable and more socialized as production gets more complex increases the output and minimizes the number of over or underworked people. We can move to universal 4 day work weeks or even 3 day eventually, by making labor more equitable and socializing the outputs of labor.

        That’s why arguing for gender roles, ie a portion of society to perform unpaid domestic labor, is the wrong way to view labor. Domestic labor should be paid labor from the social fund, and childcare should be free at point of service so that this burden of labor is more equitably spread.