Possible Debate inspired by Desperate Housewives.

[dis ms.]

I disagree. A minority is a minority. Whether or not its a "choice" is irrelevant.

Spoken like a person who has a choice.

What about people of certain religions? Certainly they CHOSE to be part of that religion and CHOOSE to practice it. Are they "less of a minority" since its a CHOICE?

When did I say you were "less of a minority"? Your words, not mine. You might want to reread my post. What I said was that you should not compare your situation to that of someone like me, a minority who didn't choose minority status.

Religion would be a better comparison for you to make because that is a CHOICE.

What if I told you I was born without the desire to have a child, just as a gay man is born without the desire to be with the opposite sex? Is that "better"? Beacuse...I always suspected I was born this way.

Good for you.

 

[goofygirl]

This is GG's M.O. She thinks she can get away with referring to parents as "breeders" and saying all sorts of nasty things about kids and families in general, and when she is called on it she starts screaming about how she is discriminated against. She's been doing it for years now, ask anyone who has been around the DIS for that long......

Its discrimination, whether you care to believe it or not. If you are blind to it, I can only pray that one day you'll open up your eyes and see..

Where have I said "breeders" on this thread??? Or any thread in recent memory???

Yes, I have said that I don't like kids. I feel I am entitled to say that as much as the person who says they "don't like childless bosses."

See what I mean? You left the person who said that they "don't like childless bosses" alone, but you had no problem slamming me. It shows right there where the discrimination is.

 

[LynnTH]

Whew. I just got done reading this whole thread. And all I have to say is I am so fortunate to work for the company I do. I work for a small family owned company (not my family). They are the best bosses in the world. We are all give sick and vacation days to use as we wish. But, they are so flexible when it comes to things with the kids. My son started 1st grade this year and my daughter started pre-school. I came in late on both days after seeing them off and they don't even count it as missed time. If I have to leave early to take one of them to the Dr or to go to one of their plays or other activity - they are the first ones to say " go - have fun and see ya later". Family is a big part of their lives and they know how crazy things can get and how important it is to be there for the kids. They know I will get my work done and if needed I will stay late or come in on the weekends (although I rarely need to do that). We have a few people in the office without kids (or they are grown) and if they need to come in late for some reason or leave early - no big deal. They are really great that way and everyone that works here gets along great and are always looking out for the company and each other. I have been here 12 years and I will retire here. I think the way you treat your employees far outweighs the monetary aspect. We are all very loyal yet we can all goof around and have fun at what we do and we all cover for each other. No one sits around complaining because someone had a dentist appt or because it was the first day of school. It's life and sometimes things need to be done during the work day and I am thankful to work for bosses who are so laid back and easy going that way. I love my job and having this flexibility is a huge part of it.

 

[snoopy]

Its discrimination, whether you care to believe it or not. If you are blind to it, I can only pray that one day you'll open up your eyes and see..

Where have I said "breeders" on this thread??? Or any thread in recent memory???

Yes, I have said that I don't like kids. I feel I am entitled to say that as much as the person who says they "don't like childless bosses."

See what I mean? You left the person who said that they "don't like childless bosses" alone, but you had no problem slamming me. It shows right there where the discrimination is.

Whatever GG. Anyone who has been around the DIS knows the ridiculous and insulting things you have said on the DIS when it comes to parenting issues. You can cry discrimination all you want, I really don't care, I find you highly amusing and always have.

As for what you said on this thread, if you were my boss and you told me that you hired me to be there X number of days, no exceptions, I'd tell you exactly what you could do with your job. My children will ALWAYS come before my career, and fortunately, most managers (parental status notwithstanding), understand this. Its not exactly rocket science....most of the workforce in corporate America are parents, and parents tend to want to protect and care for their children. You may resent that fact, but that is the way it is.

 

[snoopy]

And lest anyone new to the boards read this and think "wow, Snoopy really hates the 'child free' doesn't she?", let me just say for the record:

Bringing a new life in the world should be the most personal, seriously thought out decision a person makes. I wish people would consider more carefully before taking that irrevocable step. Anyone who question another person's decision to have children is seriously asinine....the very concept is so absurd that if I ever met someone who thought that way I would pretty much have to discount everything else the person said or thought after that point. I welcome input from people who have an interest in my children and are positive with their input, even if they disagree with me, and that goes for parents and non-parents alike. I will, however, discount ANYONE who puts down my choice by referring to me as a "breeder" or some other disgusting insult or who says ridiculous things like "I hate kids". Now THAT is discrimination.

Back to the issue at hand, I have many colleagues who are childless, since my career is not exactly child-friendly. I know for a fact that they have more time to pursue their career than I do, and I don't begrudge them their promotions, awards and other perks. But I do expect it to be *possible* to hold this job and raise a family and I would never work for a manager who felt I had to put one over the other. Never. And fortunately I'm in a financial position that I can draw that line.

 

[Wishing on a star]

I do not recall Snoopy EVER saying anything that could be considered prejudiced...

I would definately consider GG's infamous remarks, which she has posted over and over and over and over and over... ad nauseum.... to be very completely and openly and blatantly predjudiced against women who have kids. If I have formed a negative opinion of GG, it is definately NOT a prejudgement against her because she happens to be childless (by choice, or otherwise) My opinions are definately not predjudiced by her lifestyle, but formed by my reactions to her statements and her actions.... Terms like 'Breeder' are not quickly forgotten!!!!


Popcorn!!!! Get your Popcorn here!!!!!
Step right up..... don't miss it!!!
Woman mudwrestling other women.
That's right!!!
All challengers accepted!!!

Popcorn!!!! Get your Popcorn here!!!!!

 

[Jennifer S]

I am a SAHM, but I do not feel that by staying home that I will be conveying that life stops when you have kids. I think my staying home with my kids tells them that they are valuable and worthwhile. Someone has to be there with the kids when they are small....why not the mother or the father? Maybe that sublty says, 'hey, you are special and your mom wants be here with you more than anywhere else at his time in your life'. I value the time as so fleeting, I don't want to miss a minute. I can't imagine staying home sending a bad message to kids.

I think you said (much better) what I was trying to convey. Really I'm not knocking working parents - at all. Thanks for putting into words what I was feeling and saying it much kinder.

I truly am sorry to those I offended.

 

[Disney Doll]

Personal time should be just that personal. If I was Lynette, I would have just come in later that day and submitted personal time for it.

Lynette basically shot herself in the foot when she interviewed for the job stating that her kids will never come between her and her job. Kids do!

I love my children and could never imagine life without them. Have they "hurt" my career track? My lack of flexibility due to daycare restraints or school schedules did have other be promoted besides me. Does it bother me?

Well, honestly it did. I worked as hard if not harder than some because I didn't have a lunch hour because I was getting kids off the bus or had a flexible schedule. I know there was some animosity in my office because I only worked 15 hours part time and got benefits and they worked 25 hours and got benefits. Some people thought that they should work 15 as well--whereas I gave up that 10 hours to meet my kids at the bus stop. But I worked twice as hard as them to get 25 hours of work done in 15 hours.

Well, I'd have to disagrree with you there. If everyone else got benefits for working 25 hours per week, then you should not have gotten them for working 15 hours per week. You say you worked twice as hard and did 25 hours of work in a 15 hour week, but how do you really know that?

I'm not durpised there was animosity. I wouldn't have been surprised if someone had sued your employer for discrimination either, because you did get special treatment.

 

[Disney Doll]

In most corporate environments, time off is given, by hours, to everyone based on seniority and such. As far as I'm concerned, I could care less why someone is taking time off, as long as they have that much vacation or personal time available to them. Should anyone be given "special" consideration and allowed to take time off that is not counted as "personal" or "vacation" time ? Absolutely not.

Using your example from Housewives, Lynette should have been given the time, so long as it was charged as vacation or personal time. Otherwise, she should have been at work. Sorry, but personal business (including family business) is personal, and business is business. You shouldn't get special privileges just because you happen to have a child.

Here here!!!! Clapping, cheering, whistling from DisneyDoll!!!!!!!!!

 

[Disney Doll]

Many years ago when I was a full-time working mom they were good about things that came up regarding kids. Then we got a new boss who was a jerk. I got a call from the daycare that my son fell and was hurt and I needed to go. I told my boss and he was not happy about it. He called me into his office and told me I needed to choose between working there and my kids. That was easy! Gave my 2 week notice then and there!
Of course now thats probably illegal, but back then it was probably the best thing that ever happened! LOL

And that is how oyu chose to handle the problem, and it was probably the best solution for all involved. But the bottom line is that an employer should not be put into the position of having to worry about an employee's kids and their needs.

I don't have children. I would have liked to have children but couldn't. I have made many sacrifices for my co-workers so they could attend their children's events, because I like my co-workers, I odn't begrudge them thier children and their need to be there for their children.

I do have a problem with the folks who think that it is my "duty" to cover for them, do their work, pick up their slack because I don't have children and they do. I have had colleagues who have asked me why I can't work Christmas day because "after all you don't have children so what difference does Christmas make to you?"

So it's not the idea of actually doing it...covering for a co-worker parent so they can attend to their parenting duties. I am happy to do that whenever possible, have done it, and will continue to do it when possible, and my co-workers will vouch for that. It's more that it is the expectation that some folks have that I should do it. It's that...implication...that they are more important than me, their time is more important, their needs and the meeds of their family are more important.

 

[goofygirl]

Whatever GG. Anyone who has been around the DIS knows the ridiculous and insulting things you have said on the DIS when it comes to parenting issues. You can cry discrimination all you want, I really don't care, I find you highly amusing and always have.

As for what you said on this thread, if you were my boss and you told me that you hired me to be there X number of days, no exceptions, I'd tell you exactly what you could do with your job. My children will ALWAYS come before my career, and fortunately, most managers (parental status notwithstanding), understand this. Its not exactly rocket science....most of the workforce in corporate America are parents, and parents tend to want to protect and care for their children. You may resent that fact, but that is the way it is.

uhh...so now you are hurling names at me- you are calling me "amusing", "ridiculous" and "insulting."
You've reaffirmed everything I've been saying by doing this, as far as I'm concerned.
Funny that you accuse *me* of doing the same thing (calling people names, etc.)
Pot. Kettle. Black.

And yes, if I was a boss and you couldn't work X amount of days, I'd gladly show you the door and hire someone who'd be happy to work the job.

 

[RobinMarie]

What do you think of the Working Mom vs. Childfree by Choice employee situations? Should companies put family first no matter what, or is it reverse discrimination to do so?

I like the idea of companies allowing for time off to attend to family needs. In my company we have a lot of people who take time off for their aging parents needs moreso than their own children. I see these people as responsible and often have better attendance than people who seem to have little family responsibilities.

In my company, if we were to limit time off for parents, we'd better make sure we were limiting it to other employees as well.

A company should have time off policies written very clearly: what qualifies for paid time off, flex time, comp. time, exempt employees etc. If a person exceeds the amount of time off allowed, they should probably be filing for FMLA or have action taken.

Added: I'm always very nervous when a topic like this comes up because it usually means women take a harder hit than men in the workplace.

 

[snoopy]

uhh...so now you are hurling names at me- you are calling me "amusing", "ridiculous" and "insulting."
You've reaffirmed everything I've been saying by doing this, as far as I'm concerned.
Funny that you accuse *me* of doing the same thing (calling people names, etc.)
Pot. Kettle. Black.

And yes, if I was a boss and you couldn't work X amount of days, I'd gladly show you the door and hire someone who'd be happy to work the job.

Uhhh, I'm calling YOU ridiculous GG, not child free people in general. I'm not the one making sweeping generalizations about entire groups of people like you are so well known for.

But you won't ever get that....so may as well get back to your child and breeder hating self.

 

[RobinMarie]

So now we have all kinds of women here....

'Working Moms'
'SAHMs'
'Childless by Choice'
etc... etc.... etc...

We have met the enemy, and she is US!!!!!

Worth a repeat

and an edit or two, sorry Wishing

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Well, I'd have to disagrree with you there. If everyone else got benefits for working 25 hours per week, then you should not have gotten them for working 15 hours per week. You say you worked twice as hard and did 25 hours of work in a 15 hour week, but how do you really know that?

I'm not durpised there was animosity. I wouldn't have been surprised if someone had sued your employer for discrimination either, because you did get special treatment.

Wait a minute--she accomplishes possibly the same effort in less time??? She's saving the company money if that were the case.

Discrimination my foot. Benefits are just that--B-E-N-E-F-I-T-S. They are not guaranteed. They are enticements to get you to work. And companies can grant them at will to who they want when they want pretty much. And one exception--does not a discrimination case make.

Proving discrimination in this case--would probably be laughed out of court.

 

[Hillbeans]

Did anyone see that the woman who plays Lynette's boss, I think it's Joely Fisher, is 5/6 months pregnant with her 2nd child in real life???

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

And that is how oyu chose to handle the problem, and it was probably the best solution for all involved. But the bottom line is that an employer should not be put into the position of having to worry about an employee's kids and their needs.

In the example you quoted with the son who was injured--this would be covered under FMLA and a person could not be terminated for addressing a need to care for a family member...be it their child or their ill parent.

In those cases--the employer is put precisely in that position b/c the law says they have to and for good reason.

The employer does not have to pay that employee though for the time off and the employee is permitted to use vacation or personal leave to compensate if they need to.

 

[nuke]

I am a SAHM, but I do not feel that by staying home that I will be conveying that life stops when you have kids. I think my staying home with my kids tells them that they are valuable and worthwhile. Someone has to be there with the kids when they are small....why not the mother or the father? Maybe that sublty says, 'hey, you are special and your mom wants be here with you more than anywhere else at his time in your life'. I value the time as so fleeting, I don't want to miss a minute. I can't imagine staying home sending a bad message to kids.

Geez! I'm pretty sure the kids of working mother's know that they are valuable, worthwhile, and special. They also maybe have an idea that the world doesn't revolve around them.

 

[goofygirl]

Uhhh, I'm calling YOU ridiculous GG, not child free people in general. I'm not the one making sweeping generalizations about entire groups of people like you are so well known for.

But you won't ever get that....so may as well get back to your child and breeder hating self.

That's really nice. MORE name calling from you. You DO know that personal attacks are not permitted, right?

All I did here on this topic is defend the childfree, which is what I do whenever the childfree are attacked by people like you. Nowhere did I use the word "breeder" or say I "hate" kids on the pages of this topic. I said I didn't like kids (which I am entitled to that opinion, just as one who dislikes dogs, cats, etc) , that is true, but I would NEVER use a strong word like "hate."


And talk about "ridiculous", boy...how many times have I seen you post negative topics about the people you work with? It seems like at least once a month or so you are crabbing about how a coworker talks, looks, acts, etc. How petty. The fact that you have some need to constantly put down those who work with you speaks volumes.

And you say *I* am hateful.

 

[TnKrBeLlA012]

I guess this post has a no win conclusion. Everyone has their own take on the subject. Mother's versus non-mother's, good bosses, bad bosses, good companies, bad companies. The list goes on. I think like anything in life it's putting things in perspective. If you don't abuse situations a job can work for working mother's. To continue to argue over who's has the right solution is pointless. This will only lead to one thing. A closed post.