Sorry to get involved in stay at home moms discourse for like the third day in a row but like those of u who are entirely 100% against being a stay at home mother and think it’s the most anti-feminist thing in the world, ask yourself this: for women with children who have the opportunity to choose between staying home or working, if you think they shouldn’t stay home, the alternative is them working full time and being away from their children most of the time when they don’t need to be and don’t want to be (bc we’re talking abt women who want to be SAHMs and have the option to here) which causes stress for the mother and the child and is worse for both of them, plus she has to pay for child care which is often so expensive that it defeats the whole purpose of her having a job in the first place, plus she is still coming home and probably doing the majority of parenting duties anyway. Is that really the better situation than her just staying home, getting the time with her child/children that she wants, giving the children a better childhood bc they are actually being raised by their own mother and not by strangers at daycare, etc? Is that rly preferable just bc it means she makes her own money and is theoretically not financially dependent on her partner? Doesn’t make sense but maybe that’s just me ......
I know it is not the ideal situation and I think in a perfect world women would not raise children in partnerships with men at all and instead children would be raised collectively in a community setting, but since that is not very realistic for most people currently, we have to think about what is best for mothers who already have children and what is best for the children themselves. Sure it’s not the most feminist choice ever but honestly this particular situation is a bit of a lose-lose under patriarchy and capitalism so while we should aim for the ultimate goal of this choice not even being necessary, we should also consider what is actually best for the women who are already mothers in this capitalist hellscape and who just want to actually raise their own children instead of outsourcing it. And we should also think about what is best for the children themselves since I feel like that’s often something that’s entirely forgotten about in this debate
3 notes · View notes
i think i kind of hit on this in my original post at the very end there when i talk about how "chae yoon makes a living off of those surface level ice breakers, she makes a living off of being insincere in the most sincere ways, because while she truly does want to help, sometimes it's beyond chae yoon's power to do things to help people, it's beyond her control, even if that irks her. even if it makes her skin crawl to have to look u in the eye and lie about what's going to happen." chae yoon's job as a negotiatior is convincing people to do things that they might not want to do, and that includes herself, and her own precinct. her job is to meet in the middle, to compromise, so to speak, for both parties, and to keep shit from spiralling out of control. this takes a WHOLE lot of perseverance on her part because she IS going to be hitting roadblock after roadblock after roadblock if the person/people she's negotiating with is a tough cookie. and if what they want isnt what her superiors want, then she's being tugged BOTH ways, trying to negotiate with both of them, calming the tides of people who give her her pay check & call the shots AND the people who potentially have their life and the life of OTHERS on the line.
chae yoon's main internal conflict is actually based off of this and like. in a way, leads one of the big themes of the movie in my opinion. chae yoon is a little guy, in a way, whose background we know nothing about, who made a name for herself by being nothing but a fucking star at her job. tae gu is similar in this way – coming from nothing, making it big, taking control of his life where he had absolutely nothing but his sister & his name. even her boss, who objectively, is not the best dude in this, got roped in for being a little guy. he needed to pay his wife's medical bills.
chae yoon's internal conflict kind of goes as such, in my eyes like: whose side should she play, as the negotiator? if the big guns who are giving her her pay check are willing to risk innocent lives over a cock fight then whose side should she play? what is it worth having her - a little guy ~nobody~ essentially - as a negotiator if they aren't willing to listen to her? if they aren't willing to let her do her goddamn job?
chae yoon DOES try to give up. she DOES give her notice and she IS willing to sit at home and pretend not to give a damn. but then TAE GU ropes her into it. he even makes it a little more personal for her by dragging in her boss. i think. hm i think kind of in a way, tae gu helped push along chae yoon to keep going during their whole negotiation. while she was trying so hard to keep him from doing what he was going to do & to reason with him, while she was taking the chance he'd given her to change his mind, he was changing HER mind about quitting, about giving up – not that i think she wanted to in the first place, not that i think HE believed she wanted to in the first place. they were both the little guys and i think he wanted to give her something she could actually fight for, bc he knew he couldn't do it, not the way she wanted to, not the 'right' way. and i. AAAAAAAAAA
8 notes · View notes