I'd say it depends on the term. A true au pair relationship, which is temporary and a way for a foreign young person to expatriate and get paid for it is probably fine - the equivalent of an American moving overseas and teaching English. But undoubtedly many of these immigrants nanny relationships are exploitative - very few people hiring them are remitting social security taxes, for example.
What I have taken from Nietzsche's philosophy, practically, is that which is expressed in Ecclesiastes 11:9-10: "Rejoice, O young man, in your youth, and let your heart cheer you in the days of your youth. Walk in the ways of your heart and the sight of your eyes. But know that for all these things God will bring you into judgment. Remove vexation from your heart, and put away pain from your body, for youth and the dawn of life are vanity."
For a short time in my youth, my family attended a good Presbyterian church that valued and cultivated leadership from young men. I cannot think of a time since attending this church where the idea of men taking control of leadership positions to achieve something tangible has NOT been denigrated. The message offered by these churches (usually functionally nondenom-evangelical in the template created by Mars Hill) has been "go to college, get a job with a reputable company, marry a woman within the church, and have children with her." It's difficult to convey this nuance because these things are all good when aimed at the correct end; my problem is that they are not aimed at the correct end. This worldview presupposes that colleges are just there to administer credentials, and not institutions to be created, conquered, and led; it presupposes that jobs grow on trees, and aren't there by innovation in industry to drive change in the world; and, in summary and most crucially, it presupposes that the purpose of male achievement is to print dollars and status to hand to wives, who (it is presupposed) truly know what is best and what is necessary to be done. The result is a formation of men who require female approval for everything they do, rather than men doing all of these things because they see the value inherent to doing them. (The only exception to this I have seen is mentioned in the article: athletics. It's not coincidental that sports institutions mostly remain the last gender-segregated institutions.)
Knowing how to run the world is more important than knowing how to load a dishwasher or fold a fitted sheet.
Regarding the Scanlon piece: I have had far more success with dating apps than I did in church. I went on a couple bad dates from the apps, but it was always immediately obvious to me that the low quality of the date was because of the individual woman I was with, rather than a problem with the surrounding culture at large. This was a striking contrast to dating in the church, where the relationship was always going to be subjected to very minute criticism from the woman's friends, more concerned with how to tickle feelings in the perfect way than about getting anything done in the relationship. I think men who want to get married need to focus on getting married, rather than an ideologically pure avenue toward getting married -- diversifying the places in which he searches for a good wife. This could be apps or it could be in-person.
The James Richardson and Kyla Scanlon pieces were both interesting reading. The Richardson piece touches on an overlooked aspect of gender-relations issues. I grew up with one brother, a weak dad, and a rather overbearing mom who was de facto head of household. So between no sisters, no female cousins close to my age, my parents’ marital dysfunction; and male-dominated college and workplaces I’ve spent my adult life in, it’s no wonder I took until about age 30 to develop relational competence with women!
The Scanlon piece was interesting too. I’m new to online dating in my early 30s, a couple months after a breakup. After a month on a niche (catering to younger Christians) app, swiping for 5-10 minutes a day, I can see why the appeal isn’t there if one isn’t willing to pay. Every profile in a large region (all of WA state and parts of OR, ID, MT, and BC), I’ve seen 2-3 times, and very few are in line with what I’m looking for. I’ve only had one exchange of messages with a woman I decided not to pursue. In a roundabout way, the experience has motivated me to improve my in-person social life.
I am truly amazed (although I shouldn’t be regarding Leftists) and their seeming worship of Nietzsche. It’s the same of those that glorify Marx. These brainiacs should read about the men and their lives. Maybe they would like to know that Nietzsche spent the last eleven years of his life in an insane asylum.
Glad you mentioned this phenomenon of elite (mostly Euro-American families) hiring nannies of different cultures to mind/raise their children. It is the most jarring thing that I saw living in New York and was shocked that the parents would let someone of a completely different heritage, culture and/or language spend day after day with their young impressionable children.
I know a family that specifically hired Spanish-speaking nannies just so their kids would be fluent in another language. So there are benefits to doing so.
I’d enroll my children in language classes at a young age or get a tutor for them instead of hiring a nanny who would spend disproportionate time with my children over the time my wife and I would spend with them.
In the circles I'm familiar with, among relatively conservative sorts in the South, people with nannies mostly poach white American girls who work in daycare. Unfortunately, this reduces the already-low quality of the daycare labor pool, as the best ones are scooped up quickly as nannies.
In these cases (and I bet this is often contrary to NYC), the nanny seems to most often be a supplement to a SAHM who has maybe 3 kids max. My wife doesn't get it at all. Is being a SAHM to 2-3 kids really a full-time job for two people? But then I constantly have to talk her out of feeling mom shame when the SAHM+nanny kids inevitably bring the best costume/project for the school derpa derp derp.
Is my having an au pair exploitative? I'd very much like to hear Aaron's opinion.
I'd say it depends on the term. A true au pair relationship, which is temporary and a way for a foreign young person to expatriate and get paid for it is probably fine - the equivalent of an American moving overseas and teaching English. But undoubtedly many of these immigrants nanny relationships are exploitative - very few people hiring them are remitting social security taxes, for example.
What I have taken from Nietzsche's philosophy, practically, is that which is expressed in Ecclesiastes 11:9-10: "Rejoice, O young man, in your youth, and let your heart cheer you in the days of your youth. Walk in the ways of your heart and the sight of your eyes. But know that for all these things God will bring you into judgment. Remove vexation from your heart, and put away pain from your body, for youth and the dawn of life are vanity."
For a short time in my youth, my family attended a good Presbyterian church that valued and cultivated leadership from young men. I cannot think of a time since attending this church where the idea of men taking control of leadership positions to achieve something tangible has NOT been denigrated. The message offered by these churches (usually functionally nondenom-evangelical in the template created by Mars Hill) has been "go to college, get a job with a reputable company, marry a woman within the church, and have children with her." It's difficult to convey this nuance because these things are all good when aimed at the correct end; my problem is that they are not aimed at the correct end. This worldview presupposes that colleges are just there to administer credentials, and not institutions to be created, conquered, and led; it presupposes that jobs grow on trees, and aren't there by innovation in industry to drive change in the world; and, in summary and most crucially, it presupposes that the purpose of male achievement is to print dollars and status to hand to wives, who (it is presupposed) truly know what is best and what is necessary to be done. The result is a formation of men who require female approval for everything they do, rather than men doing all of these things because they see the value inherent to doing them. (The only exception to this I have seen is mentioned in the article: athletics. It's not coincidental that sports institutions mostly remain the last gender-segregated institutions.)
Knowing how to run the world is more important than knowing how to load a dishwasher or fold a fitted sheet.
Regarding the Scanlon piece: I have had far more success with dating apps than I did in church. I went on a couple bad dates from the apps, but it was always immediately obvious to me that the low quality of the date was because of the individual woman I was with, rather than a problem with the surrounding culture at large. This was a striking contrast to dating in the church, where the relationship was always going to be subjected to very minute criticism from the woman's friends, more concerned with how to tickle feelings in the perfect way than about getting anything done in the relationship. I think men who want to get married need to focus on getting married, rather than an ideologically pure avenue toward getting married -- diversifying the places in which he searches for a good wife. This could be apps or it could be in-person.
The James Richardson and Kyla Scanlon pieces were both interesting reading. The Richardson piece touches on an overlooked aspect of gender-relations issues. I grew up with one brother, a weak dad, and a rather overbearing mom who was de facto head of household. So between no sisters, no female cousins close to my age, my parents’ marital dysfunction; and male-dominated college and workplaces I’ve spent my adult life in, it’s no wonder I took until about age 30 to develop relational competence with women!
The Scanlon piece was interesting too. I’m new to online dating in my early 30s, a couple months after a breakup. After a month on a niche (catering to younger Christians) app, swiping for 5-10 minutes a day, I can see why the appeal isn’t there if one isn’t willing to pay. Every profile in a large region (all of WA state and parts of OR, ID, MT, and BC), I’ve seen 2-3 times, and very few are in line with what I’m looking for. I’ve only had one exchange of messages with a woman I decided not to pursue. In a roundabout way, the experience has motivated me to improve my in-person social life.
I am truly amazed (although I shouldn’t be regarding Leftists) and their seeming worship of Nietzsche. It’s the same of those that glorify Marx. These brainiacs should read about the men and their lives. Maybe they would like to know that Nietzsche spent the last eleven years of his life in an insane asylum.
Glad you mentioned this phenomenon of elite (mostly Euro-American families) hiring nannies of different cultures to mind/raise their children. It is the most jarring thing that I saw living in New York and was shocked that the parents would let someone of a completely different heritage, culture and/or language spend day after day with their young impressionable children.
I know a family that specifically hired Spanish-speaking nannies just so their kids would be fluent in another language. So there are benefits to doing so.
I’d enroll my children in language classes at a young age or get a tutor for them instead of hiring a nanny who would spend disproportionate time with my children over the time my wife and I would spend with them.
Yes, it's interesting.
In the circles I'm familiar with, among relatively conservative sorts in the South, people with nannies mostly poach white American girls who work in daycare. Unfortunately, this reduces the already-low quality of the daycare labor pool, as the best ones are scooped up quickly as nannies.
In these cases (and I bet this is often contrary to NYC), the nanny seems to most often be a supplement to a SAHM who has maybe 3 kids max. My wife doesn't get it at all. Is being a SAHM to 2-3 kids really a full-time job for two people? But then I constantly have to talk her out of feeling mom shame when the SAHM+nanny kids inevitably bring the best costume/project for the school derpa derp derp.