At least the author of the NYT article posted by Linkedin in Pulse, admitted that the facts and issues are still matters of debate:
The article is a circular dog-chasing-tail exercise in logic, cleverly obfuscated by layers of assertions and reference to certain surveys. It just shows, like President Truman I think it was said once (here paraphrased), “There are lies, damned lies, and then there are statistics”.
The first outrageous attack on logic is the use of the term “working mothers”. Reminds me of the viral incident even before the Internet in which one presidential candidate famously asked the wife of a couple attending his fund-raiser whether she worked. Whether she worked! Knowing she had young kids at home!
Like using as advantage that guys with working Moms are more accepting of future wives that work. Circle jerk that. That’s like saying welfare helps pay the bills for the recipients. Duh. This says nothing in a way that points in a certain direction.
Ask any mother, heck, ask the article, and you’ll find that everybody knows kids get a lot from their mothers AT HOME. A LOT. Like the toddlers that learn to read from their Moms at home.
They learn a love for reading. Maybe that’s where I got my love for books. I remember getting my first library card. It was a temporary one while they made the permanent one in those days. I made them lend me two books instead of just the one allowed. Then I made my Mom, who was AT HOME WITH ME I remember, take me back for more. Next day, my permanent card allowed me SIX entire books.
Ask any of the now millions of home schooled kids, taught by their STAY-HOME mothers, the ones that teach them at home. They are much better socialized than the ones that go to school with bullies and drugs and promiscuity and abortion traffickers, learning things that would horrify their parents, using materials that are hidden from parents.
Not just the moral values, they get better perspectives on society. In schools that are overwhelming now under mandates (command-control) to teach how fantastic their own government is, or whatever is in fashion for whatever shadow elites manage to put into these Pavlov-oriented tomes.
That’s right not only they learn better social values and practices, they also get better ACADEMIC education in math and all the STEM areas. They hit the higher echelons of the academic bees, math, geography, science and win prizes at science fairs, you name it.
Patrick Henry College, whose students are mostly home-schooled, has accumulated one of the most impressive track records of winning the moot contests held for law school students. They even twice beat the competition in Britain, using English law in an English moot court.
All this straining at gnats and swallowing camels to try to justify getting women to give up the natural maternal instinct is going to eventually implode. Either that or they’ll have to criminalize them as “useless eaters” or something, like Hitler’s pejorative for the handicapped people he slaughtered. Except the real useless eaters are the thieves of governments that steal our daily bread to support turning our children into “good little citizens”. Like that great educator (I said sarcastically) Charles Drew said.
The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom.