AI Training Is Revolutionary. Raising Humans Is Apparently Just Parenting

One of the more amusing developments of the past decade is watching the world become collectively astonished by artificial intelligence.

Suddenly we are surrounded by headlines about the complexity of training machines. Billions are being invested in teaching algorithms how to interpret language, recognise patterns, make decisions and respond to human emotion.

Panels are convened. Papers are written. Venture capital flows like prosecco at a start-up launch party.

Because, apparently, teaching intelligence is one of the most complicated engineering challenges humanity has ever attempted.

Which makes the quiet irony rather difficult to ignore.

Women have been doing something remarkably similar for the entirety of human history. And before you all come for me, the statistics still show that women carry 75% of the care burden.

We just haven’t called it engineering.

We have called it raising children.

The parallels between the two processes are surprisingly striking when you look closely.

Every artificial intelligence system begins with a base model. A kind of blank slate with enormous potential but very little practical understanding of the world. The system must then be trained. It absorbs vast amounts of input, learns patterns, receives feedback, adjusts its responses and gradually develops a more sophisticated understanding of how to behave.

Anyone who has spent time around a toddler will recognise this process instantly.

Human beings also begin life as a bundle of raw potential. They do not arrive with emotional regulation, social awareness or a nuanced understanding of consequences. Those capabilities have to be developed slowly, through thousands of interactions and corrections over time.

Someone has to teach them how to speak. How to interpret other people’s emotions. How to navigate conflict. How to tell the difference between kindness and cruelty. How to manage frustration without launching a plastic dinosaur across the kitchen.

That work does not happen automatically. It requires constant guidance, feedback, modelling and reinforcement.

And historically, a great deal of that labour has been carried out by women.

For generations, women have been engaged in what might reasonably be described as the most complex development project in existence: building fully functioning humans capable of participating in society.

Yet society has rarely described this work in such terms.

When engineers spend years training a machine to produce coherent responses and demonstrate contextual understanding, it is celebrated as technological brilliance.

When a woman spends nearly two decades teaching a child to think, feel, communicate and behave responsibly, it is often treated as a natural duty rather than a sophisticated skill.

The language we use reveals a great deal about what we value.

In the world of artificial intelligence, processes like “training data”, “reinforcement learning” and “alignment” are discussed with reverence. Entire research disciplines have emerged to study how machines can learn appropriate behaviour.

Yet child-rearing, which involves precisely these same principles applied to infinitely more complex beings, is frequently dismissed as something instinctive.

Anyone who has attempted to teach a four-year-old why biting their sibling is not an effective conflict resolution strategy will know there is nothing simple about behavioural alignment.

The comparison becomes even more interesting when we consider empathy.

For years, empathy was often framed as a “soft” leadership trait, something women were sometimes encouraged to tone down in professional settings.

Now, however, the most advanced AI systems in the world are being engineered specifically to simulate empathy in their interactions with humans. Developers are investing enormous effort into ensuring that machines respond in ways that feel emotionally intelligent and socially appropriate.

In other words, technology is now attempting to replicate qualities that women have long been criticised for possessing in abundance.

The irony would be amusing if it were not so revealing.

It suggests that the issue was never the value of these capabilities. The issue was how little they were recognised when women were the primary practitioners of them.

Child-rearing may not come with product launches, investment rounds or keynote speeches about scaling intelligence. It rarely produces headlines or market valuations.

Yet it remains one of the most sophisticated forms of development work society depends upon.

Every functioning adult walking around the world today is the result of years of careful training, emotional guidance and behavioural shaping carried out by other humans.

Very often by women.

So as we marvel at the remarkable progress of artificial intelligence, perhaps it is worth acknowledging a quieter truth.

Long before we began teaching machines how to think, women were already engaged in the far more complex task of teaching humans how to be human.

P.S. Career mum juggling too much? Let’s fix that. Book a quick chat with me here.