Does Paid Family Leave Really Hurt Women?

Last year, an op-ed at CNN by Vanessa Brown Calder of the pro-corporate LOLbertarian Cato Institute claimed that paid family leave policies actually backfire on Women by making companies less likely to hire them as well as entrenching traditional gender roles.   She seems to see it as s zero-sum game.  And to this day, the article is still being linked to on other articles discussing this important topic.

First of all, except for a very few states, the USA is the only modern or even semi-modern country that does not offer any paid leave for Mothers, let alone fathers or anyone else for that matter.  And even then, the few states that do are rather stingy  compared to most other industrialized nations.  The USA makes Scrooge look like Santa Claus by comparison in that regard. (So much for "Mothers and apple pie".)

Secondly, is there really any truth to the op-ed author's specious claim?  According to the weight of research evidence over the past decade or two, not really.  Except perhaps for poorly-designed programs that 1) force employers to pay for it, rather than via taxes (or money creation), 2) are limited only to mothers or are otherwise not gender neutral, and/or 3) have an unusually long duration--though that last one remains debatable, given the stunning success in the Nordic countries (whose durations of paid leave often exceed a year).  In fact, the only robust downside--if one can even call it that--to long leave durations (i.e. longer than a year) is that they tend to discourage Mothers from returning to paid work compared with durations between nine months and a year.  (A very subjective "downside" at that.)

Otherwise, the well-documented benefits to Women, children, society, and even men as well outweigh any supposed costs.  Ultimately, everyone is better off as a result. It is a win-win-win situation for everyone but the oligarchs.

Of course, once Women finally reclaim their rightful place as the new leaders of the free world, this will no longer even be a debate anymore.

True, paid family leave is not an end goal, but merely a good starting point for a more equitable society overall.  Other things need to happen as well, such as Universal Basic Income, single-payer Medicare For All, shorter and more flexible workweeks for all workers, equal pay, affordable high-quality childcare, as well as longer-term cultural changes as well.  And of course, the biggest elephant in the room--MEN--need to start pulling their weight for once.  But in the meantime, if we make the perfect the enemy of the good, we ultimately end up with neither.  So what are we waiting for?

THIS Is What A Real Anti-Rape Campaign Looks Like

Rape culture, or the attitudes and behaviors that promote rape and sexual assault, and/or blame, silence, or shift the onus onto victims, has been part and parcel of patriarchy for its entire 7000+ year history.  So it is not surprising that, even in the #MeToo era, the tendency to victim-blame (to one degree or another) still persists even in some anti-rape campaigns.  That is, the campaigns give Women the usual advice to not get themselves raped, as opposed to the "novel" idea of simply telling MEN not to rape in the first place.

Or, to put it as bluntly as possible, "make sure the other girl gets raped instead".  Because, let's face it, that is the cold, hard reality.  Predators will target the proverbial weakest antelope of the herd regardless of who it happens to be.

A notable exception to this persistent tendency, however, is Vancouver's "Don't Be That Guy" campaign that began in 2010 and was so successful that they brought it back just a few years later.  The rate of sexual assault dropped by 10% in 2011, which is impressive considered that it had been rising in the several years leading up to it.  And another big Canadian city, Edmonton, Alberta, has also decided to emulate such a successful program as well.

What makes "Don't Be That Guy" so different?  Because it puts the onus on MEN where it really belongs, NOT on Women.  And while many rapists, particularly serial rapists, may not be very receptive to such a message, the fence-sitters who can be swayed by cultural and social norms might.  And the good men who are not rapists who see such messages over and over may be more likely to revoke the rapists' "social license to operate" by not tolerating such behaviors and intervening when they notice red flags in that regard.  True, Vancouver also stepped up law enforcement and improved training for police officers during that time, so that likely had some effect as well, but it is almost certain that at least some of the 10% drop in the first year was due to the rape-culture-jamming messages of the campaign itself.

So remember, fellas:  Don't Be That Guy.  Seriously.  And even if YOU are not "That Guy", you probably know him quite well.