Re: "Family values"

[Katha Pollitt <kpollitt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

To clarify: I don't argue against the view that raising children is
socially valuable and necessary, of course it is -- but hey, it's not
the only activity that can be so characterized. The world could get on
fine if fewer people had kids, or had fewer kids.  Learning is socially
valuable, teaching, all sorts of volunteer and political work, art,
being a good friend. People have lots of family, social and human
obligations, not just to their own biological children. And people
should be able to pursue their own self-development, too: to study,
learn new skills, travel, go into therapy etc. One worker wants to take
time off to be with a young child; another wants health care with a
psychiatric benefit; a third wants the employer to pay for college
classes; a fourth has a brother with AIDS or an old parent. All these
claims are valid and important.
  I think parents and children will benefit the most from having
parenting presented as part of a long list of relationships and
activities that work should accomodate, rather than the only, sole,
unique thing that gets accomodated.
   Of course, work isn't accomodating any human needs or wishes so fast,
so our discussion is its usual theoretical self.

katha