Sorry if I wasn’t clear initially. The point is that women should not stay home. Yes, this is “fully gendered” because reality is fully gendered. Far and away the majority of childcare is performed by women. Always has been. Always will be.

The emphasis on jobs over children as where we want women’s energy, time, and attention to go is what is being demonstrated by this policy. We will pay you to leave your children with others. We will not pay you to take care of your children.

Why anybody thinks this will result in more children being born is beyond me. Sure, it might make it “easier” in some sense to have children, but what it teaches is job > children, and that is going to result in people learning to deprioritize children. As intended.

"We want women's energy and time" seems to indicate "not women" want women's energy in time.

If you will not pay "women" to take care of "their children" rather than, say..."the future of society" or "our children" then women will not have a child.

And that is exactly what you're seeing happen. Women worked in all times. Every single time period you can think of. Population is dropping because

a/ we have rights as women and are outstripping men on every measurable term within just a couple generations of access

b/men are not stepping up to create something more equitable

Men have been offered the chance to step up and change the current (and yes its current, not a "natural state" of affairs) dynamic.

The idea that you're striking on is defining my life for me and quite frankly, with your benefit in first position.

That's not going to work.