[facepalm]

Would you say it is unnatural to assume that a mother is more likely to be preoccupied with her baby than the father? If the plan is for the father to take over, why not mention it while fundraising?

Even so, there is physical strain that is likely to take a toll on the mother, which might cost a few productive months. Breastfeeding might also be an issue, waking the mother several times per night.

[ergothus]

You've raised questions as if I had made an argument in the opposite. Instead, I asked purely for clarity.

It's always a challenge to resolve the "separate but equal" concepts that arise from a mix of different biologies and desire for egalitarian society. I asked for the clarity because I wanted any such discussions to be directed at the right audiences, in the right context.

Apparently I failed at that, since you felt I was taking a strong position.

[st3v3r]

Because it's nobody's business what the home life plans are.

[facepalm]

What makes you entitled to receiving somebodies money, though? If they feel they want to know about your home life, and you don't want to tell, why should they be obliged to give you money? It's fine if you want to keep it private, but other people have the right to spend their money as they wish, too.

[st3v3r]

Nobody said anything about being entitled to someone else's money. So put that straw man away.

[facepalm]

The article is about raising money.

[st3v3r]

Which is not being entitled to someone else's money.

[facepalm]

If you say you should receive the same offers, it translates to "being entitled to" receiving the same offers.