TimHauck

Just read a few, they seem pretty inconsistent and inconclusive, but leaning more towards being positive. The main thing that seemed consistent was children of mothers working part-time (AKA not a homemaker) had the best outcomes. So far from a “fact” that stay at home mothers “raise better children” but you are welcome to share the literature that makes you think this. You, like Butker, are of course welcome to your opinion. This meta analysis seems to sum up what I read: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5657565_Maternal_Employment_and_Children's_Achievement_in_Context_A_Meta-Analysis_of_Four_Decades_of_Research Years of research about the nature of the associations between maternal employment and children’s achievement have been beset by inconsistent results and scant attention to the power of the findings. By and large, when significant, effect sizes were very small in magnitude. In the analyses of moderators, the direction of significant effects tended to be positive, with a few notable excep- tions for the SES, age of child, and race/ethnicity moderators. When all achievement outcomes were combined and all eligible studies were included, there was a trend toward a small positive association between maternal employment and children’s achieve- ment. However, when the NLSY redundancy was managed by substituting the NLSY-low and NLSY-high studies, and again when fixed effect trim and fill analyses were conducted, the subsequent results did not reach significance or trend levels. When each achievement outcome was examined separately, nonsignificant findings predominated. The nonsignificant findings for the effects of maternal employment on children’s achievement were not an artifact of power, although power was reduced to some extent for the analyses of moderators. Power to detect small effects was adequate for combined and separate outcome analyses, and ranged from a low of .71 for formal achievement tests and teacher ratings to a high of .99 for grades, formal tests of intellectual functioning, and the combined achievement outcomes. Despite conventional wisdom to the contrary and years of conflicting empirical findings, whether a mother works outside the home does not portend negative consequences for children’s achievement under most conditions. Indeed, there are a number of circum- stances when maternal employment relates favorably to achievement. A number of studies examined achievement outcomes for chil- dren by the extent of mothers’ work outside the home, and this distinction was consequential for the achievement outcomes. Some studies compared part-time and full-time employed samples with nonemployed samples, and some contrasted only part-time and full-time samples. When achievement was compared between part- time and full-time employment, higher achievement was found for children of part-time as compared with full-time worker

You seem triggered

I heard it predicts America will be like South Africa and all the whites will have to put walls around their houses to keep the blacks out!!!!

Link?

She’s covering her groin in all those photos, must be hiding her bulge!

Lol what makes her manly? Being a cop?

Link to me doing it? I don’t have “people,” I’m not a sheep like you.

Who here said it was horrible or even “not embraced”? The hilarious thing about the original Butker thread was that the righties here were simultaneously saying those that interpreted Butker’s words as saying he thought being a homemaker was better than working outside the home were “twisting his words,” while also saying that someone saying it was dumb of him to say that at a college graduation means they’re saying “being a homemaker is horrible” (which you’re doing now).

True, he seems to have the market cornered in “buying sh1t with money other people gave him.” Must be nice.

Bump for @EternalShinyAndChrome to actually remember what Butker said and for people to see @Cdub100 lying about people “sh1tting on moms” “hating women” and “hating the nuclear family” if they disagreed with Butker. Also interesting that @Horseman @RogerDodger / @Jose M made an appearance in this thread as he’s probably the closest to someone on this board that “hates the nuclear family” (not saying he does just the closest as he chose not to have one and has made several derogatory comments about people having kids in the past) and lastly, for @TBayXXXVII, are you against IVF and surrogacy?

Agree, except in the thread about it righties here were saying his views were “correct” and people like @Cdub100 were incorrectly characterizing those who disagreed as “sh1tting on moms,” “hating women” and “hating the nuclear family” when they were simply sh1tting on Butker for being stuck in the 1950’s

Is there any data on this? If there even is which I’m skeptical, it could be a correlation vs causation conversation because a family with a SAHM is more likely to be higher income which means the parents are more likely to be actively involved. But also, does a crackhead count as a stay at home mom?

I watched this when you first posted it and watched it again this week because I didn’t really remember. I don’t like Crowder but I thought this was a good story overall, but I felt he was trying too hard to force trying to tie the two lesbians to the overall company’s work. There are tons of people that work for companies that they don’t agree with everything the company does (cough @Cdub100 cough). I could’ve sworn there was another thread about this but I couldn’t find it. But basically, I don’t care all that much that they’re working with Saudi Arabia or China or whoever, they’re a business. And I think if it wasn’t them doing it, someone else would, they’re just the most well known. My biggest issue is that consulting as an industry seems to be a huge waste of money. And for companies that hire consultants it seems to always result in job losses.

Of course it’s not. But I guess there are @Maximum Overkill’s everywhere

It’s not, I never said it was. But Butker thinks that’s what women should want to be, I believe even @jerryskids came around to that being a paraphrasing of what Butker said.

Yes

Butker said homemaker dumbazz. Will you finally admit you were wrong for once? QUOTE: “one of the most important titles of all: homemaker.”

Me. JUST being a mom = stay at home mom = homemaker.

No liar, I cited “JUST being a mom.” Key word being “just.”

Butker didn’t say being a mother is one of the most important titles, he said being a HOMEMAKER is the one of the most important titles. A homemaker is not just a mother, it is a stay-at-home mother

lol, he did much more than “tell women it is ok to just be a mom.” He said just “just being a mom” (homemaker) was “one of the most important titles of all” Serena Williams had a career outside of being a mom and accomplished pretty much everything there was to accomplish in it, and because of her career is going to be able to financially support her family likely for generations to come. She is not a homemaker

Lol, was on Geraldo Rivera the only time he said that?

https://nypost.com/2024/07/11/sports/serena-williams-eviscerates-harrison-butker-at-espys/ All she said was “we don’t need you.” Also lol at @kilroy69 saying Williams “retiring to have a family” after a 27 year professional career is at all comparable to what Butker’s “views” are