Search Results: emotional abuse

I asked a question regarding stay-at-home motherhood, & a lot of people said "that's sexist!!! What about stay-at-home fatherhood?"

But stay-at-home fatherhood *isn't* as practical as stay-at-home motherhood. Unless a family is fine losing income whenever the mother needs to take off work for morning sickness during pregnancy:

"70% of women experience moderate to severe nausea and vomiting during pregnancy... Half of pregnant women end up having to miss work due to nausea and vomiting, 74% of which miss at least 3 days."

And even when you're in work, it's understandable it'd be harder to work as efficiently when you're in so much pain from nausea, body aches, heartburn, etc. So the man could probably get income more efficiently.

After the birth, men don't have the breasts necessary to breastfeed for the 2+ years recommended by doctors the optimal physical/emotional well-being of the child.

Someone pointed out that mothers rarely keep breastfeeding for that time, which is true, but that's because most mothers have to go back to work, which wouldn't be the case in stay-at-home motherhood.

Some people advocated breast-pumps, but that's still depriving the child of the unique hormonal benefit of oxytocin that comes from latching against the mother's breast.

Anyway, even from a feminist perspective, stay-at-home fatherhood isn't ideal because studies show that women do most of the housework even when the man doesn't have a job.

It's true that SAHM means women make less money economically, but the greater bond with the children also means that the children will be more willing to financially support them later.

Before the kids have jobs, it makes it harder for the woman to escape an abusive relationship, which is why we should advocate for available/suitable shelters/services for abused women, rather than advocating more women in the workforce.