Sundresses and rugged self-sufficiency: ‘tradwives’ tout a conservative American past ... that didn’t exist

[HarlemHottie]

@Madonna, Thoughts?


edit to add: I'm literally wearing a sundress rn, I feel called out.

 

[Μαρία]

@Madonna, Thoughts?


edit to add: I'm literally wearing a sundress rn, I feel called out.

Homemaking is a full time job and I’m glad that’s finally being acknowledged on a wider scale.

Women have always been the first teachers and nurturers and I believe we began to decline as a society when our government let Capitalism run amok to the point that both men and women HAD to work in order to sustain the average family. So women went to work and the children went to daycare for 8 or more hours a day. Then they were sent off to school, which sadly functions as a daycare for older children nowadays instead of an actual institution of learning.

This is not sustainable long term and I think the collapsing educational system (teachers quitting in droves) is a reflection of that. Women and men are attempting to self correct and the rise of Tradwives is a symptom of that IMO.

 

[HarlemHottie]

So women went to work and the children went to daycare for 8 or more hours a day.

This comment spurred me to pinpoint the exact moment and I think I found it,

Overall, women headed nearly 20% of US households during the war years. But despite public praise for female workers’ patriotism, at the beginning of the war “Rosies” with young children had few options for childcare during their long shifts. While some could rely on neighbors or grandparents, many women had moved far from their support systems to take jobs in war industry boomtowns.

In 1943, Congress allocated $20 million to create the nation’s first and only universal childcare program under an infrastructure law called the Lanham Act (1940). States and private companies used the funding to set up hundreds of “war nurseries” that enrolled an estimated 550,000 children over the course of the war. Though the program was temporary and did not reach every family who needed care, it represented an important milestone: the first time the US government acknowledged childcare as critical infrastructure.

Childcare on the World War II Home Front (U.S. National Park Service)

www.nps.gov

 

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

Tradwife = volunteer slave

 

[Dorian Breh]

This comment spurred me to pinpoint the exact moment and I think I found it,

Overall, women headed nearly 20% of US households during the war years. But despite public praise for female workers’ patriotism, at the beginning of the war “Rosies” with young children had few options for childcare during their long shifts. While some could rely on neighbors or grandparents, many women had moved far from their support systems to take jobs in war industry boomtowns.

In 1943, Congress allocated $20 million to create the nation’s first and only universal childcare program under an infrastructure law called the Lanham Act (1940). States and private companies used the funding to set up hundreds of “war nurseries” that enrolled an estimated 550,000 children over the course of the war. Though the program was temporary and did not reach every family who needed care, it represented an important milestone: the first time the US government acknowledged childcare as critical infrastructure.

Childcare on the World War II Home Front (U.S. National Park Service)

www.nps.gov

Common Socialism W :ohh:

 

[sayyestothis]

Didn't read but I think the wife should be home to be able to do for and help the kids...even when they are both at school full time it still benefits them for her being available.

And no it's not about tending the house and shopping etc...we still have a cleaning company and all...I still go to the grocery store evenly. It's about the kids.

 

[IsThatBrothaMouzone?]

They can hashtag and write all the articles in the world, but the truth is that millions have been forced in to 2 income households because of this fukked economy, inflation and capitalism.

The government doesn't like the falling birth rates of white Americans, but they know that if women stay home, have more kids and raise them, they will lose the wife's taxable income. In a 1 income household, even the husbands discretionary spending will be limited. The West gotta figure out what they want. Tradwives won't be a thing unless the economy gets fixed and things get cheaper. Simpler times fostered the family.

Rich white people = they want them to have as many babies as possible...ideally white men and white/Latina/Asian women since the babies become white anyway.

Poor white people = they want them to have enough babies to keep the military, police force, blue collar work and prison guard numbers high enough

Black people = they don't care if we have kids

 

[IsThatBrothaMouzone?]

I think you look at this subject from a black and white lens brother.

For most families, it is not economically feasibly to have a full time stay at home mom.

Forget what you see on the internet. These are fictional narratives and propaganda.


You have to go and talk to black families in real life


In fact there has never been a time in america where the black family as a whole made enough to have a stay at home mother.

True.

My mom's family was unique because all her uncles worked out in the oil fields in TX/LA and made enough to support their wives/kids but...that was very rare.