Jeez

On Saturday, writer Vanessa Grigoriadis posed some of these questions in an (admittedly flippant) Twitter thread, and a fight ensued. “I guess one of the things I don’t understand about Amy Comey [sic] Barrett is how a potential Supreme Court justice can also be a loving, present mom to seven kids? Is this like the Kardashians stuffing nannies in the closet and pretending they’ve drawn their own baths for their kids”? she asked. Grigoriadis got ratio’d, then linked to in multiple op-eds (coming from the right, and the center-left) calling these kinds of questions “anti-feminist.”

As has been true for a few hundred millennia now older children aid in raising the younger.

Are large families really in such short supply in the US that journalists don’t know that today?

16 thoughts on “Jeez”

  1. So Much For Subtlety

    Are large families really in such short supply in the US that journalists don’t know that today?

    Oh come on. She has nannies. She is a serious lawyer married to another serious lawyer. Her children’s first language is probably Quechua.

    What we see is the collision of two types of feminism. We have the hatred of normal women because it makes the inadequate feel better. Which means feminists have to hate on ACB. On the other hand we have feminism defined as anything that pisses any woman off for any reason.

    So feminist criticises fecund woman. Makes other women feel bad. Can’t reconcile the two. Unfortunately they are not like robots who remain frozen forever when faced with a paradox.

  2. My mum was the oldest* of seven, both her parents were teachers and then headteachers, and as soon as she could competantly change a nappy she was looking after her younger siblings.

    *Her and number 1 brother “born on the Board”**, whereas her younger siblings were born on the NHS.

    **Town Health Board – health care existed before the NHS!!!

  3. Dennis, Pointing Out The Obvious

    Are large families really in such short supply in the US that journalists don’t know that today?

    You’d have an easier time of it if you asked what journalists know, rather than what they don’t know.

    Vanessa G. is a white, middle-class New Yorker who writes for Slate. What do you think the chances are of her knowing anyone who has more than one or two children, let alone seven?

  4. Jgh,

    That works fine if you start with a girl. Amy Coney Barrett’s children are:

    girl (16);
    girl (13, adopted);
    girl (13);
    boy (10, adopted);
    boy (8);
    girl (6);
    boy (5, Down syndrome);

    If your first is a boy, you can expect much less help with siblings. I’d like to see some research to back it up, but it chimes with every anecdote I‘ve ever heard.

    Incidentally, the last child was diagnosed with Down’s during prenatal testing, but she chose to keep the baby. That speaks volumes about her values.

  5. “I guess one of the things I don’t understand about Amy Comey [sic] Barrett is how a potential Supreme Court justice can also be a loving, present mom to seven kids”

    Good to see the Patriarchy reasserting itself and telling these uppity career women to get back into the kitchen to be chained to that stove.

  6. @ Andrew M
    That’s a rather feminist comment. No you cannot *expect* much less help if you are a normal male – but most women are brainwashed into thinking that boys are unreliable and don’t even *ask* them to help.

  7. She seems a damned strong woman who doesn’t take any lip from anybody, not from his husband and neither from the Pope. And what Andrew M wrote, apparently not a hypocrite either. Looks very stylish and presentable too. Smart and hard working no doubt. In other words, what a woman!

  8. I’m more interested why none of this navel gazing happened when Antonin Scalia was nominated, while he had 9 children in tow.

    Oh, that’s right – he was a bloke. (And it was a different time, but ignore that.)

    Who’s gaily examining at their umbilicus at the moment?:

    Vanessa Grigoriadis

    One presumes from the name they’re female. Attacking another female.

    Isn’t there a word for this sort of thing?

  9. @PJH

    “One presumes from the name they’re female. Attacking another female.

    Isn’t there a word for this sort of thing?”

    Yes- female

  10. Enormously successful, fiercely intelligent, happily married, mother to many and a fine-looking woman to boot. The boot-faced bitches of the left couldn’t hate her more. Every one of them would rather see an actual rapist in the Supreme Court than a woman who shows them up so badly.

  11. “If your first is a boy, you can expect much less help with siblings”

    Dunno.. As the eldest son I was able and expected to watch over my brothers + assorted other family brood by the age of 5, including things like (bottle-)feeding and assorted “minor” tasks.
    Growing up, a lot of that was replaced with household chores, but the “care of” was always a part of my “duties” ( if my nieces even let me…).
    Decades later, young parents scratch their head over how I , as a confirmed bachelor without any kids, am quite capable of doing such Difficult Things as Changing Nappies, Feeding Sprogs, and Herding Daemonspawn without any obvious effort.

    The expectation pattern for boys may be slightly different, but it’s not *that* different from girls. At least in, shall we say, more level-headed families.

  12. Ditto – as the age of six, I (observed to be male) was changing my 1-year-old brother’s nappies. I remember learning the fiddly nonsense to avoid getting all the fabric in a big bundle on the wrong side.

  13. Bloke in North Dorset

    Who cares about her motherhood, she’s being hired to sit on the supreme court so the question should be what’s she like as a justice?

    As it happens the Cato Daily Podcast had someone on who did look in to it and read her opinions and she seems quite sound. She’s a textualist in the Scalia mold and she also stands up to the administrative state and takes the side of individual against the state.

    There was a time when Dems would have been pleased to nominate her.

    https://www.cato.org/multimedia/cato-daily-podcast/amy-coney-barrett-judicial-philosophy?queryID=e502e21321c8e8f85a2c10ea141c02ad

  14. Are large families really in such short supply in the US that journalists don’t know that today?

    Yes. *Especially* among journalists who are lucky to even get to the point of having a small family – intersectionality, polyamority, and just being generally unpleasant people means a lot of these people can’t form a stable, functional union early enough to snag a decent partner and spend their lives with their cats talking about how important their career was.

    Its sad to listen to all these ‘feminists’ talk like they think mothers are supposed to be chained to the kitchen when it comes to ACB – but women are supposed to be able to ‘have it all’ in any other context.

  15. During the 90s, while Gamecock’s career was still going strong in corporate America, women could “have it all.” That WAS the feminazi’s message. AC(sic)B has it all. One wonders what it is duh feminazis want. It is as if feminism is a front to get people to accept socialism, and has nothing at all to do with women.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *