We did a post of Jill Filipovic last spring when she was looking for more essays from parents who regret having children. She knew they were out there — they just weren’t speaking up. Now she has a new piece on Substack about motherhood, and she’s promoting it with a thread on how the carer/earner nuclear family model “is a historical anomaly that is tremendously isolating and often financially devastating.” The nuclear family is in the crosshairs; it’s one of those things associated with “whiteness” — as we reported in December of 2020, the New York City teachers’ union had adopted its proposed “Black Lives Matter at School” resolution, which began, “We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, and especially ‘our’ children to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable.” Note the quotation marks around “our” children.

What Filipovic is looking for is a robust social welfare state with a paid parental leave policy (that includes fathers as well) for the first year of the child’s life; then, “universal high-quality childcare.” The tweets in her thread that really getting a lot of attention are these two:

Do more sexist men make their wives stay at home, or does having the mother stay at home make the men more sexist? Or how about neither?

Good point … what if a woman’s career turns out to be one of those providers of universal high-quality childcare? Will she still be worse off psychologically, or will she feel more fulfilled raising other people’s children?


Recommended Twitchy Video