Yes, there is something unique about black breastfeeding. Several somethings, actually.
For most of U.S. history, generation upon generation upon generation of black families were torn apart. Black mothers were often not allowed to nourish and raise their own babies, but were forced to nourish and raise the babies of their enslavers. For most of U.S. history, black breastfeeding meant wet nursing white babies, often at the expense of a black woman’s own children.
Argentina, where around 60 per cent of the arable land is planted with genetically-modified soya, has become one of the countries where the agribusiness model is expanding the most rapidly. Recent years have also, however, seen the strong emergence of an alternative model promoting food sovereignty and agroecological practices, in production and consumption. Fundamental to this transition are women, who identify the agribusiness model with the patriarchal system and are insisting on the need to include a gender perspective in agroecology.
“Agribusiness is a patriarchal model. It is the men who choose it. The man takes care of the economic side and the woman takes care of the kitchen, etc., that’s why he chooses this model; it’s not that he doesn’t realise, but he doesn’t attach as much importance to his children’s health and nutrition.”
In the same vein, Pellegrini points out, that “agroecology must go hand in hand with recovering women’s role as caretakers of the land, the planet, and the family, at the same time as men learn to share the care work. We have to understand that the violence we inflict on the land with the agribusiness model is the same violence that we, as women, experience in the flesh.”
Jung and Baeck believe marriage entrenches old-fashioned gender roles, with South Korean women spending four times longer on unpaid care – cleaning, cooking and looking after children or elderly parents – than their husbands, according to UN data.
“The current government’s initiatives are not designed for women – it is for men,” said Jung. “They need women who can have babies, so the policy will repeat this vicious cycle.”
We thought we could have both thriving careers and rich home lives and make more and achieve more than our parents, but most of us have gained little if any advantage.
Gen Xers entered life with “having it all” not as a bright new option but as a mandatory social condition.
Put simply: having more options has not necessarily led to greater happiness or satisfaction. “By many objective measures, the lives of women in the United States have improved over the past 35 years,” the authors of an analysis of Census-style data wrote a decade ago as Generation X entered middle age. “Yet we show that measures of subjective wellbeing indicate that women’s happiness has declined both absolutely and relative to men.”
In 2017, another major study found that the two biggest stressors for women were work and children, with a compounding effect on those contending with both. We bear financial responsibilities that men had in the old days, but are also saddled with traditional caregiving duties.
To be a human male is to have a Y-chromosome in nearly every single one of your 70 trillion cells, with those Y-chromosomes orchestrating the production of sperm, semen and testosterone. Men are born to produce semen – which wars against women. Men are born to produce testosterone – which wars against women. Men are born to war against women. Men are primordially a war against women, a biological war against women.
How is it that the Y chromosome – the most mutated, decrepit part of the human genome, currently in a less-than-3%-left condition — has every poli-social advantage at its disposal to assure its survival and perpetuation? Because dudes sure as shit have their assess covered.
The problem with males is biology. Feminist-leaning women fail to spend what would be far-more-productive brain-time deliberating on this fact: Being a human male is a genetic condition, a genetic condition wielding a proprietary biochemistry, a proprietary biochemistry for warmongering against females – and every other fucking thing.
Critics point to stats that they claim show that Wikipedia is biased against women and female scientists in particular. Only 18% of the 1.6 million biographies in the English Wikipedia are about women. The figure is lower for people tagged as scientists – 16% of almost 150,000 articles.
‘[Notability is] a very, very difficult subject,’ says Roger Bamkin, co-founder with Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight of Women in Red, a Wikipedia project that aims to increase the number of women’s biographies. ‘When editors are arguing against notability, people will say, “Well, it’s men who are rejecting women as subjects” – and that may be true. Nine out of 10 editors are men.’
A researcher who lost her job at a thinktank after tweeting that transgender women cannot change their biological sex has lost a test case because her opinions were deemed to be “absolutist”.
In response to the ruling, Forstater said: “I struggle to express the shock and disbelief I feel at reading this judgment, which I think will be shared by the vast majority of people who are familiar with my case.
“My belief … is that sex is a biological fact, and is immutable. There are two sexes, male and female. Men and boys are male. Women and girls are female. It is impossible to change sex. These were until very recently understood as basic facts of life by almost everyone.