Capitalism is inherently patriarchal and it promotes and necessitates heteronormativity.
On patriarchy:
Capitalism rewards the people willing to subjugate others, take huge risks, and work excessively. All of these things give men an advantage when climbing the corporate ladder. I should say that this applies to most men. An even surer thing to say that obviously men dominate the highest ranks of the most extravagant companies. Some explain the domination of men in higher corporate careers with an inherent sexism of those doing the promoting. This may be true on some level, but I think the vast majority of female-targeted discrimination is caused by biological differences. Women tend to take less risks, would rather spend time with family than work (to more of a degree than men), etc. So capitalism rewards men for being men, and punishes women for being women. A socialist society would not work this way. There would be no ladder to climb; a woman could work side-by-side with a man doing the work she most enjoys.
Capitalism rewards the people willing to subjugate others, take huge risks, and work excessively. All of these things give men an advantage when climbing the corporate ladder. I should say that this applies to most men. An even surer thing to say that obviously men dominate the highest ranks of the most extravagant companies. Some explain the domination of men in higher corporate careers with an inherent sexism of those doing the promoting. This may be true on some level, but I think the vast majority of female-targeted discrimination is caused by biological differences. Women tend to take less risks, would rather spend time with family than work (to more of a degree than men), etc. So capitalism rewards men for being men, and punishes women for being women. A socialist society would not work this way. There would be no ladder to climb; a woman could work side-by-side with a man doing the work she most enjoys.
On heteronormativity:
Capitalism necessitates infinite growth despite finite resources. This is why capitalism is inevitably going to implode. However, this does not stop capitalists from exploiting any growth they can, which is why countries with shrinking populations (slowing birthrate) have shrinking economies (can't keep increasing production). This is the explanation for this video and many other similar programs in many countries around the world. The decision to start or grow a family should be between two people, but programs like these make it between two people and the economy, turning their (potential) family into a commodity to buy and sell (namely sell things to). The importance of procreation to capitalism makes it place a lot of importance on heteronormativity. The nuclear family is a very efficient economy-building machine. Buy things for your kids, buy things in competition with other families, buy health insurance for your family, buy life insurance for your family, buy a car for each member of your family, send your kids to college, etc. Non-nuclear arrangements are much less efficient. Having no kids means a huge monetary loss to the economy. So gay couples are shunned, single mothers are shunned, because often they have no money to invest in the economy, and many other arrangements are shunned as well.
An argument against this might say, "What about rainbow doritos or rainbow oreos, etc? Why would capitalists be allies of gay marriage if they were invested in heteronormative arrangements?" The answer is this: First of all, these ad campaigns are simply a money grab. Only recently did public opinions turn in favor of gay marriages. Second, these arrangements are only accepted by the majority of the people now because they have successfully convinced everyone that they are "Just like anyone else, except gay" or "Just as effective parents as everyone else", etc. Their identity is being shaped by what people think they should be instead of what they could be. Non-cis people are being confined to a hetero-lite archetype. Ever heard someone complain about pride rallies like this: "If they want us to accept them why do they act so out there and weird?" The closer this archetype gets to heteronormativity, the faster these ad campaigns will happen, and the more seemingly accepting people will be of non-cis arrangements. Note that this acceptance is not true acceptance, it's conditional. Play by heteronormative rules, like have kids (adopt), be monogamous, be a "cute" couple, don't be weird, and don't bring up your homosexuality. And there we have it. Heteroabnormal arrangements are only acceptable if they're just like everyone else: high spenders, non-rebellious, and pro-creative.
Capitalism necessitates infinite growth despite finite resources. This is why capitalism is inevitably going to implode. However, this does not stop capitalists from exploiting any growth they can, which is why countries with shrinking populations (slowing birthrate) have shrinking economies (can't keep increasing production). This is the explanation for this video and many other similar programs in many countries around the world. The decision to start or grow a family should be between two people, but programs like these make it between two people and the economy, turning their (potential) family into a commodity to buy and sell (namely sell things to). The importance of procreation to capitalism makes it place a lot of importance on heteronormativity. The nuclear family is a very efficient economy-building machine. Buy things for your kids, buy things in competition with other families, buy health insurance for your family, buy life insurance for your family, buy a car for each member of your family, send your kids to college, etc. Non-nuclear arrangements are much less efficient. Having no kids means a huge monetary loss to the economy. So gay couples are shunned, single mothers are shunned, because often they have no money to invest in the economy, and many other arrangements are shunned as well.
An argument against this might say, "What about rainbow doritos or rainbow oreos, etc? Why would capitalists be allies of gay marriage if they were invested in heteronormative arrangements?" The answer is this: First of all, these ad campaigns are simply a money grab. Only recently did public opinions turn in favor of gay marriages. Second, these arrangements are only accepted by the majority of the people now because they have successfully convinced everyone that they are "Just like anyone else, except gay" or "Just as effective parents as everyone else", etc. Their identity is being shaped by what people think they should be instead of what they could be. Non-cis people are being confined to a hetero-lite archetype. Ever heard someone complain about pride rallies like this: "If they want us to accept them why do they act so out there and weird?" The closer this archetype gets to heteronormativity, the faster these ad campaigns will happen, and the more seemingly accepting people will be of non-cis arrangements. Note that this acceptance is not true acceptance, it's conditional. Play by heteronormative rules, like have kids (adopt), be monogamous, be a "cute" couple, don't be weird, and don't bring up your homosexuality. And there we have it. Heteroabnormal arrangements are only acceptable if they're just like everyone else: high spenders, non-rebellious, and pro-creative.
