On Mother’s Day eve, I reflect on the cost of MOTHERHOOD. This is in light of reactions to @amerix Masculinity Saturday last week. He compared the world’s richest men and women, to demonstrate that women are weaker in wealth generation than men. Pole, long thread:

Environmental economics came in to save the environment, previously being sacrificed for lack of economic value. Environmental economics today is able to quantify attributes like fresh air, aesthetics and scenery, cultural values, etc. in economic terms

Along same principle, I thought about mothers and the huge sacrifices they make in motherhood. I feel this contribution is grossly undervalued in economic/wealth parameters, depicting women as less productive. Hence, there should be more regard for MATERNAL ECONOMICS @DavidNdii

Maternity spans from pregnancy, child delivery to nursing. This period is very crucial to human survival. It engages women very intimately -physiologically, emotionally and physically. All this time, a woman is disadvantaged in terms of mobility and economic productivity.

Assume it takes 3 years from gestation to the point a child is 2 yrs (though still very vulnerable). This period and the delicate work done by a woman are assumed to be “waste” economically. In fact, most women forsake employment as many SMEs can’t afford paid maternity leave

My mom begot 11 children. If you give each child 3 years of incapacitation, it means for 33 yrs of her life, my mom was not “working.” Is it fair to compare her economic productivity with a man (dad)? We need to give economic value to this MATERNAL work, its for collective good

My wife has 4 children, all through CS. Factoring gestation, CS recuperation and nursing, it means at least 12 years of her married life is economically “wasted.” But masculinity being taught by @amerix does not factor this crucial ABSENCE and sacrifice on behalf of society

I support men’s quest for ambition and greater wealth acquisition. But there is no greater wealth than children. No civilization sustains without children. China’s international clout and near conquest today is partly due to its high population. That is women’s’ (re)production

Given women’s central role in the continuation of the human race, maternal economics would repeal this negative perception that women produce less economically based (purely) on material possessions. Children are greater wealth than plots, apartments and choppers

The saying: “behind every successful man is a woman” remains true @amerix. If not a spouse, at least the MOTHER. Every great/wealthy/powerful man (or woman) has a good MOTHER behind who sacrificed career, education, a job, physical mobility and emotional comfort for them to be.

As we celebrate Warren Buffets, Bill Gates, Jack Maas and all the local tycoons, let us pay tribute to the labour involved in mothering them up. That makes mothers very wealthy. REPRODUCTION that begets children is as important as PRODUCTION that begets material wealth

While concluding this I came across this story on Michele’s “concession” for the sake children. Can we attach economic value to this concession? That’s my point.

https://disrn.com/news/michelle-obama-having-kids-was-a-concession-that-cost-me-dreams/amp?__twitter_impression=true

HMD tweeps @RasnaWarah @MizMuli @HildaMuteshi
@YatichN @DrMercyKorir @catherine_amayi @I_am_Gathoni @footsoldierRow @scheafferoo @MissKwegah1 @njokingumi @muthoni_njakwe @JerotichSeii @sarahkimani @jnyairo @wambuikamiru @WaitheraNganga @Iam_Wanjiru @CKyobutungi
@KiiruWinnie