In which the Economist literally refers to stay-at-home parenting as "a 100% earnings decline." Is this what a family culture in a death spiral looks like?https://twitter.com/TheEconomist/status/1063724705591541760 …
Show this thread
IMO, this is a status norms thing; possibly an overcorrection on old norms that dictated that having a lot of cool stuff but no kids probably meant there was something wrong with you. Now, a massive collection of status goods gets you further than having a middle-class family
-
-
There are some market-based reasons for this: if you're productive, nobody cares about your home life; all the better if there are no family obligations vying for your attention. But I don't discount the destatusing of SAHMs & millennials being memed to death on overpopulation
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
or maybe norms weren’t needed to incentivize children before there was birth control
-
Birth control opened the door for childless family norms, but was that trajectory necessarily inevitable? My read on the pill's history is that it was initially intended as a tool for planning/limiting family size, not avoiding children altogether — that was unthinkable
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.