Elon Musk's war on Head Start childhood education exposes how "pro-natalists" are really anti-woman

[marmar]

Elon Musk's war on Head Start childhood education exposes how "pro-natalists" are really anti-woman
“You do not want to give money to women," declared one leader of the movement to make more babies

By Amanda Marcotte
Senior Writer
Published February 6, 2025 6:00AM (EST)


(Salon) Elon Musk's ongoing infiltration-style coup of the federal government continues to cause chaos across the country. As Musk seizes executive powers and rejects all congressional authority, it's increasingly clear that Donald Trump is shaping up to be more of a reality TV host in his return to office than the actual president.

....(snip)....

The targeting of Head Start, a program that provides early childhood education and support for over 800,000 children, isn't a surprise to those who combed through the Project 2025 handbook. This blueprint for a second Trump term explicitly calls for the elimination of Head Start, hiding behind false claims that the program is somehow bad for children. But the driving animus the right has long harbored against Head Start was never focused on children, who benefit tremendously in both long-term measures like increased likelihood to attend college and short-term measures like improved self-esteem and self-discipline. No, the program has long been targeted by conservatives because it makes it easier for young mothers to have jobs or go to school, helping women secure economic independence.

....(snip)....

Elon Musk taking a very illegal ax to the program is noteworthy because he frequently pushes pro-natalist views, arguing that people should have way more children than they currently do. (He claims he means all people, not just white people, but his alliance with white nationalists should cast doubt on this.) But, of course, anyone who sincerely wanted to increase the birth rate would not only protect Head Start but advocate for dramatically expanding it to become a universal daycare program. Research on this front is crystal clear: Women across the socioeconomic spectrum delay having children because they fear, correctly, that having kids young will harm their financial prospects. Free universal childcare may not, in itself, address these concerns. But any program that would work would likely start there.

If these well-worn arguments feel like a waste of pixels, it's because they are based on a false assumption: that "natalism" has anything to do with birthrates. Instead, natalism is a thin disguise for a movement whose real goal is to reinstate race and gender hierarchies that elevate white men above everyone else. That much was made clear during the presidential campaign, which featured an endless number of unearthed comments from now-Vice President JD Vance which showed his "natalism" was mostly just overt misogyny. He yelled about "childless cat ladies" and declared women shouldn't be able to leave men who beat them. He even agreed with a podcast host who argued that "the whole purpose of the postmenopausal female" is to help young mothers, so men don't have to bother with bedtimes and diapers. .................(more)

https://www.salon.com/2025/02/06/elon-musks-on-head-start-childhood-education-exposes-how-pro-natalists-are-really-anti-woman/

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

1. My youngest sister was in head start

She turned out just fine.

[Igel]

3. Vast majority of kids do.

I don't know of claims that Head Start warps kids into suicide and misery.

[Oneear]

2. Donald Trump Elon Musk do not want to help Educate Children

Why does the GOP not want Children to Bloom and learn and grow to be part of the Community