this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2026
200 points (92.7% liked)

childfree

2744 readers
2 users here now

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

For context, she had a babysitter coming in the mornings to check in, make lunches, get them off to school, and prep dinner for them. All the 14 year old had to do was help them get inside after school. Microwave dinner. Get kids in bed and text mom updates. This was a work trip and they threatened to fire her if she did not go. The father has abuse charges and the police handed him their kids on top of arresting her.

Why exactly should women have kids in a world that despises them for it and yet demands they make kids anyway? What is the point?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 1 week ago (4 children)

How old do you think most babysitters even were, like 30 or so years ago? My babysitter was around12 when I was a kid. Saying 14 isn't old enough while you have cell phones is insane.

I was babysitting in the early 2000.. shit…. nvm that is almost 30 years ago… 😩

[–] bookmeat@fedinsfw.app 2 points 1 week ago

In some counties you can be a babysitter at 12. I don't see the problem.

[–] saimen@feddit.org 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well the list of harmful things which were completely normal in the past is veeeery long.

Beating your child comes to mind for example.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 1 week ago

Something tells me Trump was never beaten as a child.

[–] kofe@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Basing your opinion off of what is or was the norm rather than scientific studies where available and applicable is problematic. Not even saying you're necessarily wrong, just worth looking into the research, particularly when it comes to the well being of children imo.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, I'ma disagree with you. The country has gotten too "safety first" and "for the children". It's shit form to dictate everything allowed just based on safety.

[–] kofe@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

...you disagree that looking at research is wise when considering what is best? That's. Unfortunate.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, research shows that you don't know how kids turn out until after they're adults and raising their own kids, and by then there's an impossible amount of variables to account for and only a few snapshots of what was working in the modern age, at best.

Now aside from all that spiel, you're trying to change what the point is. It's stupid to just always go with "the safest thing". What's your master plan? Eliminate all risk at the cost of freedom and fun until the odds of tragically dying reach an equilibrium with people killing themselves from being depressed?

[–] kofe@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

You do realize I never even shared my own stance of what I think might be best, correct?

Sounds to me like you have some resistance to looking at research, which again, is unfortunate. Your own stance might be backed by it.

My master plan here is to encourage science literacy. That's it.