Does collecting WIC, SNAP, AFDC, and Section 8 while having multiple bastard children count as “working full time”?
After sitting in the parents’ section of the Stanford football players of 2012 - 2016, including 3 Rose Bowls, I’ve learned that Stanford moms kick butt!
Maybe my ideas don’t jibe but being a mom is an eighteen year job. It’s hard doing both. I’ve seen women busting their butts trying to raise a family and get a degree. Not many succeed in both. Just personal observation I’d suggest a woman needs to pick one or end up failing at both( most)
While obviously true, this idea is fundamentally anti-feminist, anti-leftist and anti-post-modern.
Except for a few intelligent parents, American society will plug their ears and ignore such information.
There needs to be something other than economic pressure to guide peoples' behavior or the demographic transition will depopulate the Earth.
[“The additional time, energy and attention that stay-at-home-mothers were able to devote to supervising their children’s studies and peer interactions and to participating in school-related volunteer efforts seem to have paid off in terms of their offspring’s academic success,” study author Nicholas Zill said in a statement.]
AOC would say that’s white privilege!
The most ideal situation for a human child is to be raised by both of his two living parents until maturity. Mom in the home.
Anything less than that is short of ideal. In that case have to do the best we can. But it’s what we should strive for.
There was a meta study that came out a couple of decades ago that said the same thing. On all measures of well-being, achievement, etc. mother care produced the best result. The number two position I think was religious orphanages. Third party care including nannies, grandparents and day care were not so good.
Water is wet. Story at 11. Kids with attentive stay-at-home parent(s) do better in school. No shit.
Woh rich kids get into good schools. Go figure.
We all know it’s true, but I hate reading about it. Now the colleges will deduct points for kids who DO NOT have to deal with career-driven moms.
“In the study, the families in which both parents worked full time earned the most money (median income $80,000), but parental attention outperformed money at securing children’s education prospects.”
That makes no sense? They are saying that kids whose parents DO NOT keep up with the Jones’, but rather spend their time being real parents, do better? I’ve always heard that the woman needs to work, so that the family can ‘live better’ (or that mom is bored staying home).
“Putnam found “virtually all the increase in female employment over the last two decades of the twentieth century was by necessity, not by choice.””
“Necessity” is a very subjective word. Does that mean living in the ‘better house’ with the ‘better schools’, and then negating all of that with kids that grow up to be losers (per the article)?
This article begs the question as to why caring, involved, stay-at-home parents would want to have their children sent to “selective” colleges, such as Stanford, that would go on to destroy their children by indoctrinating them with their atheistic, communistic, race-class- gender world view.