I would not describe these women as 'subjugated'. First of all, most can work if they choose, because they are all college educated. In at least one family I know, the wife is college educated and capable of earning more than her husband. They just choose not to, and their families take whatever hit that means. I mean, I tell my wife all the time she should work if she feels like it (she is a software engineer actually, and, for when she was working, a quite well paid one I might add), but she doesn't want too, and that's okay by me. I also don't want to work, because it'd be more fun to be with babies all day and make more of them. Ultimately, the most precious gift you can give a child is both their parents at home most of the time, but in the absence of that, having one parent home is good.

I don't mean that out of some disdain for families who cannot do that. My own parents (immigrants to this country) could not, and I wish they could have, and I am happy we can pull this off. To be fair, they made up for it by accepting jobs that let them be home more. Like my dad refused promotions so he could be home with his children more often, and my mom became a teacher to spend more time with us. The value of such a gift is incredibly understated in modern society, as is the joy of children.

> The problem is that there is no support in the U.S. for working couples who choose to move away from family for economic opportunity.

There is a lot more than their ever was (governmentally at least), and people are not having children. The issue is we've abandoned all community institutions, but this is due to the aggregate choices of many people, not a social policy, IMO. Speaking of the families I was talking about, we rely on each other for many things you'd rely on family for, like babysitting.

> I also don't want to work, because it'd be more fun to be with babies all day and make more of them.

I mean, this is just not true, you know. Being with babies whole day every day is not fun for overwhelming majority of adults, neither male nor female. They may see meaning in it, but like, fun it is not. And it definitely is not easy fun when you are on fourth or fifth baby, meaning care about siblings too.

Also, managing both 5 kids and full time job would be pretty hard even if good daycare is available. Your "she can go to work because she has college" completely ignores logistics of it and expectations on software engineers these days.

Sorry let me rephrase. If she would like to work and me stay at home id be happy with that. Children are work but they are by far the most important.

As a child I wanted to be a stay at home dad, which i realize makes me somewhat odd, but we are odd people

Gotcha now. Maybe you will be able to switch for some time at least.

My wife and I are working towards financial independence so we can both stay home / work from home part time.

Sorry let me rephrase. If she would like to work and me stay at home id be happy with that. Children are work but they are by far the most important

> Ultimately, the most precious gift you can give a child is both their parents at home most of the time

I don't remember this being my dream as a child, quite the opposite actually.

Can you explain how OP‘s wife is subjugated? I’m ex Microsoft. My wife is a better programmer than you and me put together. She stays at home with the children voluntarily. I told her if she wanted to switch places, I would stay at home with the children. Is she subjugated? Would I be subjugated if I stayed at home instead?

How did you get 'subjugation' from staying at home?

It's the obnoxious, upper middle class hyperfeminist careerist rhetoric that we've been taught to believe. Funny, Chesterton once wrote that he found the feminist clamoring for women in the workplace rather intriguing. Most people, most men, perform rather boring and menial jobs. Why a woman would trade the privilege of raising her kids, shaping the future generation of mankind, for 8+ hours of twisting screws and hammering nails, he could not say. The reason the men were doing it was primarily to support their families.

This isn't to argue that women should be barred from working. It is merely to emphasize that this rather vicious characterization of women who raise their own children as "oppressed" or "subjugated" has the very real potential to amuse those women who are confident enough in having chosen their children over their careers.

I would argue that a lot of actual oppression of that gender comes from a lack of consensus within the gender

But thats only an issue because all the extremes seem to speak on behalf of all women

I have the wrong body parts so my observation is irrelevant

How about subjugating them to be wage earners, just to keep the banker/rentier class in clover?

no the plan is:

> create choices

> shame women for making the choice that already existed and you didn't have a hand in creating

Some women want roles other than those historically performed by men. They are not subjugated. The ideal for women should not to be indistinguishable from men.

people fought for choice, the trend of vilifying a choice and infantilizing woman who made a choice is ironic