this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2026
221 points (99.1% liked)

Progressive Politics

4388 readers
416 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Heritage Foundation’s latest document, “Saving America by Saving the Family: A Foundation for the Next 250 Years,” was published in January, and its purported goal is to reverse the country’s declining birthrate.

See, if you can’t physically force women to have more babies, which is what abortion restrictions aim to do, you design government policies that pressure women into having more babies.

You cut off opportunities outside the home, you make the public sphere hostile to women’s independence and you create a system where the only viable path left for a woman is dependence on a man for survival. In other words, you drag the country back to a time when women had fewer choices.

top 42 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 4 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

you design government policies that pressure women into having more babies.

Like only 2 weeks or less for maternity leave?

Or lower tax rates for married couples?

[–] sneakypersimmon@lemmy.today 4 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Like outlawing abortion and no-fault divorces.

Once a woman is trapped with a baby and no way to get a divorce and daycare costs more than she can make at a job, she's stuck.

[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

Lol ikr. There are absolutely policies like this that would incentivize people to have more kids but for some reason it's out of the question. Like how study after study shows abstinence only sex ed is terrible at stopping teen pregnancy yet southern states keep doing it anyway cuz it's about control not stopping teen pregnancy.

[–] manxu@piefed.social 11 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I commented.on a different post that what we have lost in the 21st century is the belief or hope that things are improving. That had been the cornerstone of all politics since 1945; things are imperfect but they are getting better.

Now it's the opposite. Two décades of things rushing from catastrophe to calamity, and the really big ones only gave us hints, yet.

It's not just that it's hard to want to force a human to be born into this kind of world. It's also that a child is a financial anchor and burden that may end up preventing your own évasive maneuver.

Give families the resources they need to raise a child. Give them a cheap place to live, jobs that don't kill you, healthcare that doesn't bankrupt you, and éducation that makes people better.

We can do it. We just choose to bomb Iran instead.

[–] bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 hours ago

People are less likely to build community with children as well. "Rugged individualism" and all that.

Nothing screams "american" like 4 kids, a ford expedition, and never talking to a neighbor or anyone with a slightly darker skin tone than you. Not to mention never voting for things that dont affect you directly, and having zero critical thought about how your actions affect others.

[–] Zomg@piefed.world 7 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Sounds like Taliban type shit.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 hours ago (2 children)
[–] Zomg@piefed.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Brother ewwww

[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

Damn she got all that work done but kept the bangs lol

[–] regedit@lemmy.zip 10 points 12 hours ago

I remember reading a comment on a similar article about why people don't have more kids anymore. It summed it up pretty well:

Caged animals don't want to fuck.

Make the world prohibitively terrible, where we all feel like trapped animals in a system we can't escape, and we'll focus on survival.

[–] AlecSadler@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 17 hours ago

Heritage Foundation can fuck off and die.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 21 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

You cut off opportunities outside the home, you make the public sphere hostile to women’s independence and you create a system where the only viable path left for a woman is dependence on a man for survival.

Ethics aside (yes, I know that's a huge asterisk):

  • We've set up society to be dependent on dual-income households. Given that the most commonly cited reason people aren't reproducing (starting later, stopping sooner, w/e) is economics, limiting women's ability to contribute financially to a household is only going to exacerbate this.

  • As a childfree man, I don't want a woman to be dependent on me. If my partner is stuck at home due to being unable to work, that isn't going to make me suddenly decide that I want to become a parent. If I was on the fence (which I'm not), it would definitely push me onto the "no" side of the fence due to financial considerations.

This is just fucking stupid and won't work the way they think it will.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 5 points 15 hours ago

They don’t need to plan for that. The climate crisis will force societal regression and poverty, limiting job opportunities. They’re already anti-anthropogenic climate change so they’re doubling down on the (likely) inevitable.

[–] Wataba@sh.itjust.works 5 points 16 hours ago

Man, if only people showed actual opposition to the party blatantly puppeteered by them.

[–] ramble81@lemmy.zip 40 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Literally shit that Al-Queda is doing in Afghanistan and yet people still don’t realize it.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 hours ago

We had "grab them by the pussy" and more women than ever voted him in again.

[–] sneakypersimmon@lemmy.today 26 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We're literally bombing Iran for doing the exact things that conservatives here want to do.

[–] ThatOldEngineerGuy@lemmy.zip 19 points 1 day ago

Yep. Except the conservatives here believe they're more right because they're less brown and more jesusy.

[–] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 54 points 1 day ago (3 children)
[–] sneakypersimmon@lemmy.today 52 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I'd rather die than be forced to be dependent on a man and forced to birth him babies.

Riot indeed.

[–] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 32 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Same, but that feeling for my daughters. Its looking like if I dont fight they will have to and fuck that, too.

[–] sneakypersimmon@lemmy.today 24 points 1 day ago (2 children)

On the bright side, women had already figured out how to get around no-fault divorce. We can always go back lol

[–] fartographer@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago

What are you gonna do? Stab me??

[–] ceiphas@feddit.org 13 points 1 day ago

But this time the black widows will go to a procreation center instead of a prison, and their uteruses will be sold by the state or rather the contractor to patriot men...

The hand maids tale, but without a shortage on fertile women will be way more disgusting

[–] youcantreadthis@quokk.au 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Its really sad killing the fuckers doing this wont fix anything and theres nothing to be done.

[–] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Its just too bad making it so these people cannot operate or propagate in physical reality anymore is not a solution, so sad.

[–] youcantreadthis@quokk.au 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Yeah. Oh well.

Woah. Buncha subs just banned me for saying murder wont help?

[–] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A billionaire ended today is a genocide stopped tomorrow.

[–] youcantreadthis@quokk.au 2 points 21 hours ago

Oh. I guess youre right. Yeah. Not killing billionaires is complicity in the end of humanity? Im actually pretty okay with that. Both options sound cool.

[–] fartographer@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago

I'd rather die than have my wife be forced to be dependent on me, and that's a BIG "fuck no" on us having babies. I've met us, I know what horrors await our combined genetics.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 7 points 21 hours ago

Can you imagine me supporting my entire household on my income? Forget about the stress of being the sole provider; there is no regular family out there who can live on one income!

[–] youcantreadthis@quokk.au 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sucks the heritage fpundation has like a building and killing affiliated scum wont help or fix or prevent anything bad. Because of how easy it would be.

[–] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You a nihilist, too bro? I knew I liked you

[–] youcantreadthis@quokk.au 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Not philosophically. i was saying murder is bad dont do murder. But i guess thats bannable now. New internet is weird.

I like community and stuff. I think thats better. I just havent found anything but high-school-ass tribes. It makes me really sad. Still looking. Feels quixotic at this point. Doing my little actions i can do on my own. Feeling like im wandering the ruins of a dead world. Like im never talking to individuals, but feds, people playing tribal politics at me, and myself. Thats what drugs are for i guess.

Someday ill either find real people who have ever read a book. Maybe even one or two who thinks im cute? or ill fuck up a dose and die. That sounds more likely. People dont exist anymore. Id resolve to die violently, to not go gently into that goodnight, but i kind of hate everyone too much to give them that.

[–] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The machine stares back, sibling. It burrows into your fleshy corneas and embeds itself. Becoming a translation layer that trashes critical thought and incentivizes reductionism. It is the void made manifest in the once beating hearts of the wouldbe sentient. It presents itself as an unassailable wall of progress, unstoppable and omnipresent. It is not. Burn it down.

[–] youcantreadthis@quokk.au 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

I do what i do. I would feel really shitty risking seriously for slaves who worship their chains and identity 'anarchists' who have never thought for themselves in their lives.

[–] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)
[–] youcantreadthis@quokk.au 1 points 14 hours ago

Cant see link. Does not like my browser.

[–] Jrockwar@feddit.uk 36 points 1 day ago
[–] Paragone@lemmy.world 11 points 21 hours ago

Please understand that this is instinct, not political-variant-specific, or culture-specific:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1369118X.2024.2445637#abstract

male-supremacy is the bedrock of totalitarian-authoritarianism, is what the evidence has been showing us, all along.

The "taliban", the "christians", zionists ( yes, the "Israel" which brags sooo much about women's rights compared with other cultures, is eradicating women's rights, & some stories about that have got visible ), the Asian equivalents, it's consistent that murdering women's validity is the basis for authoritarianism's "kingdom".

Ask yourself if the root-guru of the Christians, benJoseph, meant male-supremacists or women, in his "The Meek Shall Inheret The Earth", meaning they'll have their own flowering-time.

( "stalk-growing-time" or "animals-and-tribes-time" is the past 6 "generations"/"ages".

"flowering-time" is the time we're offered, if we get through "The Great Filter", as whites call it, or "The Great Purification", as American Indians call it: it's got nothing to do with gender-supremacy: it's got to do with values & souls.

The fact that male-supremacy has trod-on women's souls for millenia means that needs total undoing.

It in no way requires that male-lives' souls be trod-on, no matter how much male-culture presumes that it "must" mean that, in its exclusive-binary-only "reasoning". )

It's truly the deepest prejudice there is, among our world.

Babboons, chimpanzees, & human-male-supremacism are all absolute-prejudices.

Human-prejuduce, however, is voluntary & that is a difference which needs to be converted to removed.

_ /\ _

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 3 points 20 hours ago

all women should move to a northern border state like Montana and just fucking take it over. take over every government office, and declare sovereign independence from the US.

just become absolutely hostile towards conservatives, and force them out.

should plans not work out, just flee to Canada.