Advanced Search
Welcome to Omgili,
Omgili (Oh My God I Love It ;) is a search engine for discussions. With Omgili you can find answers and solutions, debates, discussions, personal experiences, opinions and more... To learn more about Omgili click here.

This is a complete preview of the discussion as it was indexed by Omgili crawlers. Use this preview if the original discussion is unavailable.
Click here to view the original discussion.

There's a sub-reddit specifically for the baby/parenting articles : women

Http://www.reddit.com/r/parenting Being a woman does not necessarily mean having babies, being a parent doesn't necessarily mean being a woman.

Being a woman does not necessarily mean having babies, being a parent doesn't necessarily mean being a woman. It's a statistical fact that female parents read parenting articles far more often than male parents.

There is a reason why every major parenting magazine is targeted almost exclusively at women. There's a sub-reddit specifically for the baby/parenting articles Yes, but it is not as dense or active a community as this one.

Excessive compartmentalisation has its downsides.

I don't see a problem with the women subreddit having parenting articles as long as they're not taking over the subreddit completely (they're not).

It's a statistical fact that female parents read parenting articles far more often than male parents woo state-istics woo

Oh come on. So I said the S-word, my bad.

Doesn't make the fact any less true.

It's a statistical fact that female parents read parenting articles far more often than male parents.

There is a reason why every major parenting magazine is targeted almost exclusively at women. Statistics first and foremost are a very poor source to wage an argument from.

Number crunching in no way describes the social conditions of the statistics resulting, it merely analysis a current state, with no insight into why, or how these things came to be. In regard to more female parents reading parenting articles - this has a fairly obvious source. Women are the dominant parent.

As women are subject to being the stay at home parent - far more often than men are - it is inevitably going to be the case that the parent in constant direct contact to raising children will be reading more of these articles and books etc.

By no means is this choice the majority of the time.

Women suffer incredible societal pressures to assume the role of maternal house-wifehood.

The inequalities in the work force mean that it is only economically logical that the one who can earn the most will take care of the income, while the other will assume the role of caregiving.

It so happens that men have a far greater income in ratio to women based on the centralisation of women into lower paid industry, and of course, due to the basis of unequal pay for women.

Also, other societal pressures come into consideration, such as social relations, the ideology of women's inate maternal instincts etc. I agree, there isn't a problem with parenting articles, they are relavant to alot of women.

I think the point though is that not all women intend to be parents, and with a constant stream of articles about parenting in an area designated for all women to participate in, may enforce the stereotypes of women's role as the maternal creature. I think the author of this self-reddit was right saying what she had said.

Women do not always have to have children, and being a parent isn't always restricted to be a woman.

I agree wholeheartedly with everything you've said, even right down to your last paragraph.

But I don't agree with your (and the OP's) implication: that all this means that we ought to move all parenting articles to the parenting subreddit. The fact remains, many women are parents and they find the parenting articles here useful.

I myself am one such.

Moving articles to ever tinier niche subreddits lowers the quality of discussion following the articles drastically.

And I bet everybody here is trying to battle creeping subscriptions-itis.

I am subscribed to 15 subreddits - enough already! All women can and do participate in the women subreddit.

Why deny a significant section's interest in parenting?

If some women here are interested in sewing, are we going to banish their interest to a sewing subreddit too?

And what if some women are interested in professional atheletics - is that interest more acceptable here simply because it doesn't give the impression that we're just a bunch of sissy women here doing sissy women things?

I do agree, I am not trying to advocate a complete transference, nor do I believe the author of this article wants to either. I think of this as more of an alert to the fact that there is a parenting subreddit.

That there is a place where more of these articles can go. We can admit it is difficult, and often frustrating for many women to have pregnancy and babies pushed on them, even if it was unintentional.

I don't think the intention is to marginalise women who use these articles or want to see them.

I see this, as stated, as an alert to say there is an area for those specific interests - perhaps in order to lessen the frequency of pregnancy and parenting articles, perhaps to make this subreddit more comfortable, less perpetual of social stereotypes for all women?

Nor do I believe the author of this article wants to either. I think she does.

Maybe Dammitdoll can explain what she intended? We can admit it is difficult, and often frustrating for many women to have pregnancy and babies pushed on them, even if it was unintentional. I agree with that - and we can have articles on the phenomenon submitted here.

I do not agree, however, that discussing this in the women subreddit is something we need to apologise for.

It's the women subreddit, and pregnancy is about as purely a female issue as you can get...

Deal with it! There are women here who are not wrapped up in self-consciousness about the image we are presenting to the male population of Reddit.

I think that needs to be encouraged. ETA: I think a better solution is that if someone is offended by the parenting articles, they can implement a Greasemonkey script filtering out any submission with certain keywords.

There's one running on my Firefox browser now that blocks all content from HuffPo, Alternet etc, and any headline containing "Obama" or "Bush" or "vote up if".

When dealing with arrogance statistics are a very poor source to wage an argument from

What the heck is that supposed to mean?




Omgili Home About FAQ Plugins Usenet