Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The article basically says that we have to make work flexible (and convenient for women) just so that they can have babies.
I'm fed up with so much feminist bull****. Look, more men die due to drunk driving than women. What do we say to the men? Don't drive after having alcohol. Yet, I bet if it were the other way around, in other words, more women die from drunk driving than men, then we probably would be turning cars into bumper cars so that women can't die when they crash into each other.
Why would other people be bothered to make the workplace better for women with kids. It's their own fault for having kids. If they can't handle it then they shouldn't be working and taking care of children at the same time. I have a pet dog. Should I complain to my manager about overtime because I need to give it a bath?
Quote:
There are steps that can help. Universal preschool programs — like the statewide one in Oklahoma — would make life easier for many working parents. Paid parental leave policies, like California’s modest version, would make a difference, too. With Australia’s recent passage of paid leave, the United States has become the only rich country without such a policy. (Giving parents here a full year of leave for each child would cost about $25 billion a year, or less than 0.2 percent of gross domestic product, Ms. Waldfogel says.)
Can somebody please subsidize dog school for me?
Quote:
If you want a preview, you can look at the few professions in which large numbers of highly skilled women have been able to force change. Obstetrics used to be a field that required doctors to be on duty at all hours. Today, group practices allow obstetricians to share the 3 a.m. deliveries and, in the process, have a life outside of work. Optometry and veterinary medicine have their own versions of this story.
Ok. What about the long waiting lists? Why not make the police or fire fighters go off at 3AM too.
Quote:
On the other end of the spectrum, low-income women generally do not have a choice between career and family. Many are single parents. Their chances of escaping poverty are hurt by the long-term costs of taking time off after childbirth and having little flexibility in their schedules.
I thought you needed to have sex to get babies. Were all the single parents raped?
Quote:
“Women do almost as well as men today,” Ms. Waldfogel said, “as long as they don’t have children.”
Crackheads do almost as well as average people today, as long as they don't smoke crack.
Meh - Australia has had 52 weeks of unpaid maternity leave in place since 1979 - and most companies I was ever employed by also had paid maternity leave, some up to 26 weeks paid. Not to mention there's the Australian "baby bonus" plus child allowances........
All the new law really does is give every working Australian woman the right to 18 weeks of paid leave.
fwiw prior to this new law 39% of the female workforce already HAD access to paid maternity leave.
As pointed out Australia has had unpaid maternity leave for a long time.
Also, Australia has had a declining birth rate for a number of years. The baby bonus scheme implemented by previous government of $5000 was well recieved.
"A new national standard that gives all women the right to take a period of paid leave will also be a major benefit to maternal and child health and development”, she said."
Its in our interest.
Its a woman's fault for having children? right. Okay. Now go to bed and suck your dummy.
People like to point out that family development will improve if businesses make jobs more family-friendly (really meaning more mother-friendly).
However, the business of business is to make money, pay its workers and stockholders. It doesn't include a vague mandate about improving family life. Now, if a company wants to be attractive to certain kinds of job seekers, then of course it can do so. However, in the present environment, that is most unlikely.
I'd like to suggest that no one is choosing between kids and career. People who aren't stay home parents with another adult supporting them have to work for a living. A lot of people choose not to have kids regardless of their work. And by the way, only a few people have "careers." Most of us have "jobs." Big difference.
I personally feel that one cannot be in two places at once. If someone chooses to have a child and be the primary caretaker, then that person cannot be in a job or career path that is moving forward, and shouldn't expect to be treated on a par with the person who has been on the path.
I'm a feminist, I mean "egalitarian." As a childfree-by-choice person, I get tired of the rhetoric of "We/Society needs to take care of mothers and children because then everything will be better..." Whaddya mean "we?" "We" don't get to vote on who has how many children or any at all. People just have 'em as they want to- not because "we" need them.
And "woman" need not equal "mother." A father can stay home with a child and/or do shift work or whatever.
"We" need to create career paths etc. etc."... WHo's smoking what? In this job environment, just having a job feels pretty good.
(As I post from my third-shift job after things finally quiet down).
You forget that those children will eventually pay into the social security system. Our nation would be in bad shape if everyone chose not to have any.
Location: Stuck on the East Coast, hoping to head West
4,641 posts, read 11,955,074 times
Reputation: 9887
How about the fathers step up to the plate and take on more of the child rearing responsibilities? Generally speaking, if working men took on as many child-rearing responsibilities as working women, I can guarantee there would be changes in the workplace. I bet the kids would benefit, too.
I'm not saying that women shouldn't have children. But they simply can't expect that the unpaid 52 week leave will have no negative affects on their careers.
Imagine if the CEO of BP got pregnant when the oil spill happened.
How about the fathers step up to the plate and take on more of the child rearing responsibilities? Generally speaking, if working men took on as many child-rearing responsibilities as working women, I can guarantee there would be changes in the workplace. I bet the kids would benefit, too.
Incidentally, I know of 3 full time stay at home dads.
They actually preferred it.
But, I would say they are the rarity and not the norm that is for sure.
I would love to be a full time stay at home dad. Unfortunately, I'm not given that option.
Until that option is made available to me, stop whining and get back to work!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
