Popular Ballet

black character shoes ~ ladies size 6 by marilyn4
For sale: very gently used pair of black character shoes, ladies size 6, Capezio Located in Port Perry Asking $20








Forum: Arts / Debates

Page:
Page 4 of 51 2 3 4 5
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By Tansey Comments: 2218, member since Fri Mar 27, 2009
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 01:08 PM
Edited by Tansey (209516) on 2012-04-16 14:28:53 typo
LlamaLlamaDuck wrote:

Here paid leave is 12 weeks for mom, or 9 months for dad... it can be split between the parents (mom can take 6 and dad can take 6)

A mom can get 12 weeks of paid leave, but a dad can get 9 months? Can you explain this? I find it surprising.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By GingerPremium member Comments: 1528, member since Thu Feb 14, 2008
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 01:08 PM
Edited by Ginger (192059) on 2012-04-16 13:14:02
YumYumDoughnut wrote:

^ No no, I meant why is that the standard that the government sets? Why would a dad need 9 months to "recover" from a birth when the mom GAVE BIRTH and she only gets 3? Or is it 12 months total for each married couple to decide what to do with that time?


In Canada, it's 15 weeks for a woman who gives birth (if you adopt, you don't get this 15 weeks). Then there is a further 35 weeks that can be taken by either parent (if you adopt, you only get this 35 weeks). So the mother could take her 15 weeks+35 weeks parental leave for nearly a year to care for her child, or the mother could take her 15 weeks maternity leave and an additional 10 of the 35, and the father could take the remaining 25 parental weeks so the are both off for about 6 months. Or the woman could take the 15 weeks maternity leave, and the father could take the 35 weeks parental leave. I think that's what LLD and her husband did. Does that clear things up?

Edit: The 15 weeks maternity leave (which you can take as early as 8 weeks before the birth) is intended as a medical leave, hence why families who are adopting are not eligible for this leave. The 35 weeks is intended for family bonding time, which is why men and/or women can take them.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By tumblebugPremium member Comments: 10099, member since Fri Mar 29, 2002
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 01:09 PM
Edited by tumblebug (25049) on 2012-04-16 13:10:07
Edited by tumblebug (25049) on 2012-04-16 13:14:19
^^^Right but you put the arrows directing to what I said about what you said which was in reference to maternity leave. If you had left the arrows out, then I could see that, but you were referring to a quote in which you did specifically mention maternity leave.

And yes, I understand your thread got WAY off track lol. It happens :P
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By YumYumDoughnutPremium member Comments: 7996, member since Sat Jul 10, 2004
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 01:14 PM
Edited by YumYumDoughnut (99333) on 2012-04-16 13:16:54
Tumblebug .If you look at my first 7 replies on this thread, I made no mention of maternity leave. If you look at what I have said, I am not against temporary maternity leave.
So now, why the hostility? I already said women and men should have maternity leave ALONG with personal time off if needed.

PLEASE link me to where I said childbearing is a vacation?

Plus you brought your 2 dead sons into a debate. There is NO FREAKING WAY anyone can debate with you anymore without feeling like an jackbutt about it.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By tumblebugPremium member Comments: 10099, member since Fri Mar 29, 2002
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 01:17 PM
Edited by tumblebug (25049) on 2012-04-16 13:20:14
Um, no hostility towards you dear. I was referring to something you said regarding maternity leave, which I quoted in my post. You responded that you didn't say anything about maternity leave in that quote, but it wasn't the case. I was pointing that out. That was all.

PLEASE link me to where I said childbearing is a vacation?

Plus you brought your 2 dead sons into a debate. There is NO FREAKING WAY anyone can debate with you anymore without feeling like an jackbutt about it.


I didn't say you did? Others did. Please try not to take things so personal. I brought up that situation to back up my point that the main purpose of maternity leave is medical. That has been my stand on the whole debate. I trying to provide some factual evidence to back that up. Again, please don't take it personal. I love ya girl <3
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By YumYumDoughnutPremium member Comments: 7996, member since Sat Jul 10, 2004
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 01:20 PM
What?

I didn't talk about maternity leave in my original quote.

Color me confused.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. (karma: 1)  en>fr fr>en
By tumblebugPremium member Comments: 10099, member since Fri Mar 29, 2002
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 01:22 PM
Not in the original quote. It was mid-way through the debate. I quoted it, responded to it. You responded that you didn't say anything about maternity in that particular quote (by the way of the arrows lol). It's ok. Let's just drop it, k?
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By LlamaLlamaDuckmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member Comments: 7702, member since Sun Nov 21, 2004
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 01:52 PM
12 MONTHS... brain fart

Comment #9917532 deleted
Removed by CienPorCientoPAZ (147923) on 2012-04-16 16:22:06 Not even worth my time

re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By YumYumDoughnutPremium member Comments: 7996, member since Sat Jul 10, 2004
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 04:40 PM
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By Munkensteinmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member Comments: 14365, member since Mon Aug 11, 2003
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 05:25 PM
I just popped in here to make one correction...I don't even remember who said it cause it was earlier in the thread, heh.

Both of my UNpaid 'maternity leaves' were under FMLA, which doesn't care if you have children or not, and is available for everyone. Whether you use it to take care of your sick grandmother or I use it recover from childbirth is no one's business.

This is false, as FMLA only applies to immediate family members - spouse, parents, children. I wanted to take FMLA to stay with my grandmother when her health started to deteriorate but I couldn't. It makes me sad that somehow "immediate" family members are deemed more important than others.

It seems like everybody is so into hoarding leave time and such...it would be so much easier to just provide leave time to people when they need it rather than trying to come up with ways to force people into saving hours or whatever else. I'm in a job that provides paid leave and there are people who save up their sick leave like crazy while coming to work sick and infecting everybody else. It drives everybody crazy and our boss has nicely suggested that people go home if they come in and are obviously sick. It's a shame that most employers don't have enough confidence in the honesty of their employees to change the way leave is handled. It makes me sad that people "have" to go to work when they're sick, miss family vacations, etc. because they can't afford to take time off.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By tumblebugPremium member Comments: 10099, member since Fri Mar 29, 2002
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 05:34 PM

This is false, as FMLA only applies to immediate family members - spouse, parents, children. I wanted to take FMLA to stay with my grandmother when her health started to deteriorate but I couldn't. It makes me sad that somehow "immediate" family members are deemed more important than others.


Really? That blows. I guess some employers are probably more lenient than others. I know people who have used the unpaid time under FMLA to take care of grandparents, so either the employer was very understanding or didn't know that it didn't include grandparents. It should. When it comes to time off for funerals grandparents are included as immediate family, so I don't know why this wouldn't be the case with FMLA. What a load of crap! Either way, my point wasn't really the specific family member. It was the point that it doesn't matter what the reason, it's no one's business.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. (karma: 1)  en>fr fr>en
By kandykanePremium member Comments: 16128, member since Mon May 01, 2006
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 05:49 PM
I know people who have donated their leave time to help a coworker out in an emergency. They collected almost six months for her.

kk~
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By YumYumDoughnutPremium member Comments: 7996, member since Sat Jul 10, 2004
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 05:51 PM
^ Yup, that seems common at my boyfriends work. ( Never happened at mine).

During a family emergency, a bunch of co-workers donate their vacation time so that person can leave on pay. One guy collected like 4 weeks worth of vacation time on top of his own when he had a family medical crisis.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By hylndlasmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member Comments: 7167, member since Wed Sep 22, 2004
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 05:53 PM
^ yeah I remember a time when my office mates who were federal employees donated spare leave to a co worker who's wife was killed in an auto accident so he could care for their young son while he recovered from his injuries from the accident. I also know that the Army will forward you leave in certain circumstances and so will some companies... My current one included.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. (karma: 6)  en>fr fr>en
By Cienmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member Comments: 6043, member since Tue Dec 20, 2005
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 06:08 PM
Dancing_EMT wrote:

I don't understand why I need to pay for someone who did something even a dog can do to take off for 6 weeks

I'm sorry...did you just compare people who have children TO DOGS? Did you really just do that? That is by far the most disgusting thing I have ever seen you say on this site, and you have said some pretty offensive things on this thread alone. We all know you don't want kids, but there's a point where strong feelings just turn into pure, unwarranted hatred. You need to take a step back before you say things like that.

Also, EMT, I can't believe you tried to give Texas as an example of a remotely successful or good family planning/birth control program. Texas is ONE OF THE WORST STATES to be a woman in right now. What a joke.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. (karma: 2)  en>fr fr>en
By Nyssasisticmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member Comments: 3461, member since Sat Sep 20, 2003
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 06:41 PM
Edited by Nyssasistic (74238) on 2012-04-16 18:44:02
Wow, I've read this entire thread and there are some really, really strong feelings one way or another.

To the original question, I think the only scenario in which it would even be reasonable for an organization to pay a woman for staying at home is if she is paying for her rent/food/gas etc.
I stay home (for the most part; I have a few contracting jobs for massage I do here and there) and I don't expect to be paid. However, the being "paid" 50% of the household's income isn't quite accurate either- unless we were to divorce, I do have access to 100% of our income and could do with it as I please if I wanted. Being in a marriage doesn't mean I get half, it means that Hubby and I are both entitled to 100% of everything as a family unit. Unless I individually had to start paying living expenses, I don't expect to be paid individually for doing something that contributes to the family unit on a whole.

As far as the maternity leave debate goes, I guess I see WHY childless people want to liken their maternity leave to a vacation or a nose job. However, maternity leave is NOT any sort of vacation for either parent and yes, a child is going to be more of an asset to society than someone's personal vacation or cosmetic surgery... Especially if that child's parent gets maternity leave so they can properly take care of their child.

I don't understand the double standard: People don't want parents to take maternity leave; yet they whine and complain about people not raising their own children? You can't really have it both ways. It's reasonable to WANT people to try and pay/take care of their own kids, but LIFE happens and when it does, we as a society should be in the business of helping people out instead of mercilessly shaking our fingers and saying that they should have known better.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By Kekoamember has saluted, click to view salute photos Comments: 8863, member since Sat Jul 19, 2003
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 06:47 PM
CienPorCientoPAZ wrote:

Dancing_EMT wrote:

I don't understand why I need to pay for someone who did something even a dog can do to take off for 6 weeks

I'm sorry...did you just compare people who have children TO DOGS? Did you really just do that? That is by far the most disgusting thing I have ever seen you say on this site, and you have said some pretty offensive things on this thread alone. We all know you don't want kids, but there's a point where strong feelings just turn into pure, unwarranted hatred. You need to take a step back before you say things like that.

Also, EMT, I can't believe you tried to give Texas as an example of a remotely successful or good family planning/birth control program. Texas is ONE OF THE WORST STATES to be a woman in right now. What a joke.


Agreed, especially as someone who has openly discussed her problems with her reproductive organs :? Completely taking away things like lack of sleep, breastfeeding and bonding, even the most uneventful birth takes time to recover from.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. (karma: 1)  en>fr fr>en
By dust2dustmember has saluted, click to view salute photos Comments: 4463, member since Wed Dec 07, 2005
On Mon Apr 16, 2012 07:02 PM
We in the USA already have a system for paying mothers who sit on their arses and feel entitled to be payed by the government for doing so. It's called welfare.

If you don't feel you can cope with having kids and being able to support yourself (or even just the lifestyle you want), you should probably think twice about having kids, or at least think twice on what you want your lifestyle to be. The whole 'we should pay moms because without them we would go extinct' argument honestly makes me laugh, too. Looking at all the booming populations around the world, I think that's the least of our worries.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By oz_helenmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member Comments: 11196, member since Sat Aug 10, 2002
On Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:03 AM
dust2dust wrote:

Looking at all the booming populations around the world


Oh really?

Helen
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By YumYumDoughnutPremium member Comments: 7996, member since Sat Jul 10, 2004
On Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:21 AM
Edited by YumYumDoughnut (99333) on 2012-04-17 00:33:59
Overpopulation is a real threat .
www.biologicaldiversity.org . . .

Today’s global human population is over 7 billion. Every day, the planet sees a net gain of roughly 250,000 people. If the pace continues, we’ll be on course to reach 8 billion by 2020 and 9 billion by 2050.


species are disappearing about 1,000 times faster than is typical of the planet’s history. This time, though, it isn’t because of geologic or cosmic forces but unsustainable human population growth.


I should also mention there are 192 countries with a positive growth rate as of 2010. Verses 38ish with a neutral or negative growth rate.

en.wikipedia.org . . .


The majority of the declining populations listed on the wikipedia article fall within 4 major certain part of the world. ( See the image in red) As you can see the United States and Australia weren't on the list. I think there are financial incentives that these countries offer to have children. I believe that the Japanese government pays women to have children, due to the decline of child birth.

An example is given of countries with overpopulation also. I think that dust2dust was talking about population of the world as a whole.

Plus 10 of those countries listed something along the lines of emigration as a reason for the decline of population. It doesn't mean that the kid just disappears into thin air, they just relocate that kid. Which still means the population of the world didn't actually go down, Johnny is just living in New Zealand now.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. en>fr fr>en
By YumYumDoughnutPremium member Comments: 7996, member since Sat Jul 10, 2004
On Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:43 AM



Would have been good to include the image I was referring to eh? This is taken from the wikipedia article that oz_helen posted.

As you can see by this image, the declining populations seemed to be clustered in specific areas of the world.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. (karma: 1)  en>fr fr>en
By djcharamember has saluted, click to view salute photos Comments: 951, member since Mon Jan 11, 2010
On Tue Apr 17, 2012 09:51 AM
Edited by djchara (219250) on 2012-04-17 10:03:54
Edited by djchara (219250) on 2012-04-17 10:05:05
Edited by djchara (219250) on 2012-04-17 10:07:33
Edited by djchara (219250) on 2012-04-17 10:09:43
Oh my...

First of all, to Dust2dust (and dancingEMT, judging by your karma comment on D2D's post)--It's great to have grown up in a situation where working hard means that you will be successful and financially secure, but that is just not the reality for many people. Poor=/= lazy. The reality of a capitalist economic system is that some win and some lose and while people who "win" generally do work hard, people who lose are not necessarily lazy women sitting on their "arses" all day collecting welfare checks. Are their people who abuse the system? Sure. But to suggest that welfare is simply a way for lazy, "entitled" people to mooch of the government is ridiculous... www.fair.org . . . (This is out of date but still good food for thought.)

Second, barriers to family planning, both to education about it and to the actual methods themselves, are problems that are deeply-rooted, in many developed societies, particularly the US. It's not simply a matter of

Dancing_EMT wrote:

someone who couldn't keep their legs closed and had a child even though they couldn't afford it


This is a bit of a hijack and I can go on forever about this topic, but many women simply have not been educated on good family planning methods. For example, in my county the public schools use this curriculum for sex-ed: www.choosingthebest.org. You don't have to look very far in the website to see that all they care about is abstinence. But in a culture in which sex is so pervasive, it would be better to give students real practical advice for how to prevent pregnancy rather than just unrealistically expecting that no one will lose their virginity until they are married and financially secure. There are complicated cultural issues at play that are far more than just a matter of women not having sufficient self-control...

Take a look at this article: www.guardian.co.uk . . . Anyway, I'll stop now because that isn't really what this thread is about but I just can't stand these sweeping generalizations that all women who can't afford their children have no self control and people on welfare are lazy.

Regarding the original question, I think that paying stay-at-home moms is probably never going to happen. But were it to happen, even though I never plan to be a stay-at-home mom, I don't see a problem with it. Why? For the same reason that others have mentioned, that raising the next generation is an asset to society. Yes it is a "lifestyle choice," but it is a lifestyle choice that helps society in the long run, where other lifestyle choices (i.e. a gym membership or a trip to Europe) do not.
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. (karma: 9)  en>fr fr>en
By ChristinePremium member Comments: 6138, member since Wed Feb 04, 2009
On Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:57 AM
Edited by Christine (207347) on 2012-04-17 12:02:11 so many mistakes!
Edited by Christine (207347) on 2012-04-17 12:33:57 typo
I searched for the "just because you pop out a kid" quote, but couldn't find it. I just don't have the stomach to keep looking.

I would just like to go on record as saying, "There is a little more to this than just a 'POP'."

Moving on... the tone of may of these opinions (and yes, I know everyone is entitled to their own opinions)is disturbing. Most people don't expect hardship, abandonment, changing economies,special needs children or other hazards that befall citizens of the planet earth.

Dancing_EMT wrote:

why should MY salary go to someone who couldn't keep their legs closed and had a child even though they couldn't afford it


A mother is someone who couldn't keep her legs crossed? Perhaps at the moment of decision, they could "afford it". My friend and her husband converted their home to make it into a "mother -daughter" home to accommodate her widowed mother. Her mom was happy and excited to care for their young children while they worked and paid the bills. Grandma got a brain tumor and died, leaving my friend and her husband with a big mortgage and no grandma to keep up the other end of the deal. Things happen. Humans deserve the benefit of the doubt, not so many harsh judgements.

Why should I have to pay for someone's parental leave if they won't pay for me and my husband to go to Europe for 6 weeks?

This is a joke, right?

if you get pregnant and you can't afford the kid, don't expect ME to help pay for it, I should not have to pay for people's stupid decisions. If you are elderly or legitimately disabled, I have NO issues helping you, you do not choose those 2 situations (usually), but paying for someone's kid they couldn't afford? Nope, sorry, you're on your own. You should have made better decisions.


And I assume this imaginary baby should have made a better decision and not exited the birth canal? By this logic, "on your own" applies to the child.

I don't understand why I need to pay for someone who did something even a dog can do to take off for 6 weeks, when if I wanted 6 weeks PAID leave to go do whatever I CHOSE to do, I'd be laughed out of the office. Kids are a choice, plain and simple.


In my own experience, NOTHING as complex as the human condition is EVER plain and simple.... and just for the record, dogs seem to suck at family planning. Checked out the animal shelters lately?

I shouldn't have to pay for someone to take off for making that choice. If you can't afford to take 6 weeks off of work to "recover", then that's your problem, not mine.


Whether you acknowledge it or not, it is your problem. If the village doesn't manage the needs of all families properly, the problems of others will quickly come home to roost. God help us all when we age if an entire generation of children are viewed as a burden and not as a treasure.

I've been resisting the temptation to address this original question in earnest because frankly, the question is ridiculous. However, the ugliness that is being expressed by some members just boggles my mind. I can't imagine spouting opinions about people who choose to remain childless who then need the assistance of other people's children when they age and do not have their own families to care about them. Why the hostility?

Note to self...
Image hotlink - 'https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-ZNQZgFwqnfc/Tny9ChtkAjI/AAAAAAAAFaU/L_cBwjFfGBU/11%2B-%2B1'

Keep On Dancing*
re: Should a woman get paid for being stay at home mother. (karma: 5)  en>fr fr>en
By hylndlasmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member Comments: 7167, member since Wed Sep 22, 2004
On Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:11 PM
I find it funny that some of the harshest critics on this thread ( and they know who they are) also at one point in their lives had to seek help from others just to get by.

Interesting that now when they have gotten on their feet ( or say they have ) all of a sudden it's horrible that people are receiving assistance. Funny how now that things are better for you you have so conveniently forgotten what it's like to need some help.

You seem to have some deep seated issues that you haven't worked out for whatever reason. Perhaps instead of being so hateful and spiteful your energy would be better spent trying to figure out WHY you feel the way you do?
Page:
Page 4 of 51 2 3 4 5

ReplySendWatch