Monday, November 23, 2015

World Economic Forum Promotes "Goo Goo Ga Ga" Time for Fathers

Yes, father's should spend 24 hours a day for months with newborns. It's too bad nature didn't create men with the ability to breastfeed.

I have more thoughts on this absurdity here.



  1. Is this really just a sad attempt at controversy marketing?

  2. When we had new-borns, my ex would retire at 9:00PM, I would stay up to watch SCTV and such, the baby would wake at 12:00 or so, I'd get the breast pumped milk, feed the kid, then I'd go to bed. Ex would get up at first cry, breast feed kid, etc.
    I'd get up later, got to work at 9:00.
    Rinse and repeat. No days lost.

  3. The paternity leave is a gimmick that privileges women and mothers. Why does this have the stench of a feminist hit? Oh, because it's attacking men or guilting them into compassion "that we should all feel and share the responsibility." Awwww.

    Get over it.

  4. Many successful Silicon Valley operations were funded by DARPA and off-book MIC front organizations. Their ponzi-like financial statements have been made possible by Fed money printing and ZIRP. Consequently there is very little about them that is truly capitalist. 

    Crony corporatists don't have to concern themselves with competing in a free market, and like good fascists much of what they pretend to do is just a public show. 

    Suckerberg is a particularly loathsome creep who recently asked Comrade Xi if the Chinese leader would name his child. If "Paris is worth a Mass" as King Henry IV said, I suppose a child's name is a good bargain in exchange for Facebook's entry into China. Naturally Xi considered the request ridiculous and sensibly declined. 

    Living in the belly of the beast must be intoxicating as the fed currency units rain from silicon skies but one should never lose sight of what these people and their corporations are really all about. 

  5. Maybe people should value their families enough to make themselves so valuable to their employer that paternity leave isn't in question.

  6. I see how it’s useful to have one parent (either one - screw the gender role stereotyping) or a deeply trusted caregiver there to make sure the kid is directionally treated the way the parents wish. Beyond that, I also don't see the value-add of having two parents for a 2-month old, compared to the value-add of being out there working/achieving something. Zuckerberg of course need not work another moment financially, but does he not have more to accomplish, greater contributions than diaper changing, which a 2-month old is indifferent to anyway?

    RW is right that dual parent 24/7 presence for a newborn is overkill. If the adults don't have more important things to do with their lives than act as mutually redundant nannies, then they are not achieving at a level that will serve a good role model and inspiration for their child. Children should learn right away their every whim is not going to be waited on hand and foot at enormous cost by both parents 24/7.