Possible Debate inspired by Desperate Housewives.

[goofygirl]

GG, you are entertaining if nothing else. You've been complaining about carpet creeps and breeders and such for about 5 years now. That is after you stepped down from your duties with the "Give Kids The World" campaign that you obviously got involved with because you thought it might score you some perks. And after you posted about being on the fence about having children, and how your mother was putting pressure on you. After those two events, you've been on and on with yourself, crashing parenting threads and insulting parents on the DIS for years now. So don't you DARE tell me I am the one who is prejudice! I am ALL ABOUT CHOICE and respecting OTHER PEOPLE'S choices....you on the other hand are not.

Wow. You really believe all that, don't you?

The term "carpet creeps" never came from me. I do remember who DID indeed use that term, but I don't want to name names.
I was involved with GKTW because it was a good cause. The only "perk" I got was access to a private board that other DISers aren't allowed to access. So, NO.... perks were not the reason for my involvement.

I was never a fencesitter. I repeat, NEVER a fencesitter. And I don't appreciate you saying false things about my mother. She never pressured me to do anything.
And by the way, threads relating to parenting don't belong to parents alone. ANYBODY has the right to post to them. That is not "crashing", except in your imagination.

I am finished talking with you on this topic, Snoopy. I'm done with this topic in general, time to move on. Besides, there's all a whole crop of new parenting thread I have to "crash", and I'm behind.

 

[snoopy]

Wow. You really believe all that, don't you?

The term "carpet creeps" never came from me. I do remember who DID indeed use that term, but I don't want to name names.
I was involved with GKTW because it was a good cause. The only "perk" I got was access to a private board that other DISers aren't allowed to access. So, NO.... perks were not the reason for my involvement.

I was never a fencesitter. I repeat, NEVER a fencesitter. And I don't appreciate you saying false things about my mother. She never pressured me to do anything.
And by the way, threads relating to parenting don't belong to parents alone. ANYBODY has the right to post to them. That is not "crashing", except in your imagination.

I am finished talking with you on this topic, Snoopy. I'm done with this topic in general, time to move on. Besides, there's all a whole crop of new parenting thread I have to "crash", and I'm behind.

For someone who is done talking, you sure are running your mouth a bunch.

I have a looooong memory GG. I remember how you kissed up to Pete Werner and respresented a cause for a population of people you profess to hate, and I remember your thread on the subject of your mother putting pressure on you to have a child because you were her only child. Up until that point I found you somewhat bearable if not a bit of a butt kisser. After that, you got on your "child free" mission.....and I have to tell you, I've been embarrassed for you ever since. You certainly DO NOT represent any child free people I know, and most child free people on this board have told you that. Yet you continue to spout your rhetoric and then cry foul when people call you on it.

But do continue to run your mouth, I find it highly amusing, as always.

 

[snoopy]

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.

What does my topics about the people I work with have to do with this topic GG? You tried to stir the pot with this several weeks ago and I laughed at you, gonna go 2 for 2? My co-workers and I enjoy each other immensely but recognize one another as the imperfect human beings that we are, sorry to burst your bubble there. The fact that you think I'm hateful is actually quite amusing to me, the woman who professes to hate all children....keep your hate on, GG, I take that as a compliment.

 

[snoopy]

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.

And bringing this back on topic (once again), I don't think the issue of taking unexpected time off in the workplace is not really about mothers, not at the heart, it's about compassion and realizing that other people may not be able to live up to your expectations of them, due to outside forces. In other words, stuff happens, and people are going to need to take care of their business.

I also don't think you need to be a parent to sympathize with a parent taking off to be with their sick child. I mean, my parents are dead, but I can sympathize with my co-worker who needs to take off to take care of her elderly parent.

In other words, business will survive for as long as we do, but our relationships with other people die with the individual. You treat your fellow colleagues the way you want to be treated and you'll end up on top.

 

[WDWguru]

Its not exactly rocket science....most of the workforce in corporate America are parents...

Sorry to dig this up a whole day later, but this struck me as inaccurate, so I had to look it up. As it turns out, parents with children under 18 at home are NOT the majority of the workforce in this country.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2004 employed parents with children still in the household totaled roughly 31 million. The total number of employed people (I used the age 20 and up qualifier, to exclude teens) is 71.2 million for the same time period.

So parents with children at home to take care of make up less than half of the workforce. It just makes companies who provide inequivalent benefits (family-slanted for the most part) seem pretty shortsighted.

 

[kidshop]

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.

Um, I made no judgement or comment on mothers who choose to work. I was responding with my thoughts for *myself* regarding a post that said that maybe staying home sends the message to the kids that the mom's life has stopped for the children. You don't think kids should be the center, but *I* do (for myself). Who is right? I have no idea, but I know this is the right answer for me. That in no way reflects on you.

 

[snoopy]

Sorry to dig this up a whole day later, but this struck me as inaccurate, so I had to look it up. As it turns out, parents with children under 18 at home are NOT the majority of the workforce in this country.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2004 employed parents with children still in the household totaled roughly 31 million. The total number of employed people (I used the age 20 and up qualifier, to exclude teens) is 71.2 million for the same time period.

So parents with children at home to take care of make up less than half of the workforce. It just makes companies who provide inequivalent benefits (family-slanted for the most part) seem pretty shortsighted.

Well, I guess I stand corrected.

Although I never once said my company or any other I've ever worked for provided inequivalent benefits for employees with families. Benefits such as number of days off are based on how many years an employee has worked for the company. Leeway is granted across the board for emergencies, and it is generally accepted that parents take off when children are sick, when employees have spouses who are hospitalized or otherwise incapacitated, or when an employee has an elderly parent to care for. I've never encountered anything other than a mutual respect for one another where these sort of emergencies are concerned. There have always been both parents and non-parents alike who abuse the vacation/personal time off policy, but that isn't the norm. Most people are mindful and respectful of each other, and covering for each other when another has taken off is no big deal, regardless of what the reason.

 

[WDWguru]

I agree that with flex time and time off, most companies are fair. But the inequities typically come into play with things like insurance coverage and additional benefits. At my company and many others, there is one price for a single person to take insurance and another for 2-4 or 2-5, but no option for just two people. If you want to cover two people, you pay as much as it costs to cover four or five. A company I used to work for had child care benefits, but no alternative choice for those who didn't need that -- like gym membership, tuition reimbursement, etc. There was a package geared to one set of workers and that was it.

The point I was trying to make in my last post with the statistics was that this is very often where those inequities appear. Rather than offer several options that cost a similar amount to the company and allow employees to choose the benefits that best fit their needs, they create blanket packages that often are geared to families with young children. That doesn't seem to make sense, considering most of the work force is not in that situation.

 

[huey duey & luey]

This probably sounds corny but I really wish that we could return to an era where familytime was valued and a priority, and not thought about as an inconvenience. Where people/communities supported and helped eachother not tore eachother down. You never know when you may need some time off, what if you or your parent became ill and needed to go to a dr. I really feel for working mothers, because I think they have a lot of pressure to be perfect in both aspects and not let one part of their life interfere with the other., which is virtually impossible.

 

[simba122268]

bump

 

[BlingBlingJoe]

Wow

 

[Viking]

I think special consideration should be given to working mothers because they are raising the next generation of workers. This is something that should be encouraged. Childfree by choice is not contributing to society in this way.

So what if soemone is childfree because of biological reasons? Some people want children, but can't have any.

 

[Viking]

I agree that with flex time and time off, most companies are fair. But the inequities typically come into play with things like insurance coverage and additional benefits. At my company and many others, there is one price for a single person to take insurance and another for 2-4 or 2-5, but no option for just two people. If you want to cover two people, you pay as much as it costs to cover four or five. A company I used to work for had child care benefits, but no alternative choice for those who didn't need that -- like gym membership, tuition reimbursement, etc. There was a package geared to one set of workers and that was it.

In my country we have mandatory health insurance, this means that everybody has to have a health insurance, but the choice to pick the insurance company he/she likes best. But in this system families are also privileged:
-A single pays a premium of about 13% based on his/her salary, which is split 50/50 between employer and employee.
-A couple with no kids pays two premiums when both work - each person pays those 13% then!!
-A couple with just one person working pays on premium only, the spouse is insured through the working partner's premium.
-A couple with as many kids as they want to and one working parent also only pays one premium.

So for example: DW and I both work and so both pay. Two persons-Two premiums.
My sister with two kids is SAHM, so only her DH pays. Four persons-one premium.
And you can bet, that with two kids they more often have reasons to require the services of their health insurance than we do.

Nevertheless I don't complain about this as we live in a society. Society is Latin and means 'living together'. Everybody takes care of everybody else - within certain limits, of course. I'm also not very fond of people living on welfare and breeding like rabbits - But I guess that's another topic

 

[goofygirl]

For someone who is done talking, you sure are running your mouth a bunch.

I have a looooong memory GG. I remember how you kissed up to Pete Werner and respresented a cause for a population of people you profess to hate, and I remember your thread on the subject of your mother putting pressure on you to have a child because you were her only child. Up until that point I found you somewhat bearable if not a bit of a butt kisser. After that, you got on your "child free" mission.....and I have to tell you, I've been embarrassed for you ever since. You certainly DO NOT represent any child free people I know, and most child free people on this board have told you that. Yet you continue to spout your rhetoric and then cry foul when people call you on it.

But do continue to run your mouth, I find it highly amusing, as always.

Running MY mouth?? Pot... Kettle... Black.
I said over and over again I did not EVER say "HATE", but you refuse to believe it for some strange reason. Whatever. You will believe your "memory", believe what you will want to, no matter how WRONG it is. Its kind of a shame, really.
I think its a scream that you seem to think you know how MOST or ALL childfree people feel since you have that ONE childfree "friend" (supposedly). I belong to an international childfree organization that has thousands of members, I attended a convention where I communicated with hundreds of childfree people, and I also belong to many online childfree boards where thousands post, so I think I have a pretty GOOD idea of what childfree people think- much better than YOU do.

About your coworkers- I was just pointing out that I think its very snobbish and backstabbing of you to come on here and pick on them for lame reasons. You can spin it anyway you want, but you are acting the very same way that you accuse ME of acting. THAT was my point. But of course, you will probably just respond to this by calling me all kinds of names and accussing me of all kinds of false things again. One track mind.

 

[goofygirl]

Originally Posted by diznygirl
"I think special consideration should be given to working mothers because they are raising the next generation of workers. This is something that should be encouraged. Childfree by choice is not contributing to society in this way."


Well, hopefully the next generation will gain 100% employment, but the truth is not ALL of the next generation will be working, just as not ALL of today's generation doesn't work due to various reasons: by choice, medical reasons, economic, etc.
I'd also like to point out that the childfree by choice contribute to society in many ways. Our taxes pay for your kid's public school after all. You don't need to raise a new generation to contribute to society. If you are going to get special consideration, I'd like some special consideration as well.

 

[TDC Nala]

I work for a federal agency. ANYONE can flex time if they want to, and you get a certain amount of annual leave time that you can use for whatever purpose you like.

Since my office is small, they need people to cover the office at all times. On days for which many people are likely to request leave, my office uses a first come first served policy. If you put in for leave early, you get it. Once the boss has decided she needs everyone in the office who hasn't put in for leave yet, she will close leave requests for that date (the day after Thanksgiving gets booked up really quickly). The office has a mix of parents, non parents, and those whose children are adults. The family status is not taken into account when determining who takes annual leave on popular dates. The boss might also change her mind about the cutoff if she gets a sob story and the requester isn't someone who has previously given her problems on leave issues.

 

[dis ms.]

Running MY mouth?? Pot... Kettle... Black.
I said over and over again I did not EVER say "HATE", but you refuse to believe it for some strange reason. Whatever. You will believe your "memory", believe what you will want to, no matter how WRONG it is. Its kind of a shame, really.
I think its a scream that you seem to think you know how MOST or ALL childfree people feel since you have that ONE childfree "friend" (supposedly). I belong to an international childfree organization that has thousands of members, I attended a convention where I communicated with hundreds of childfree people, and I also belong to many online childfree boards where thousands post, so I think I have a pretty GOOD idea of what childfree people think- much better than YOU do.

About your coworkers- I was just pointing out that I think its very snobbish and backstabbing of you to come on here and pick on them for lame reasons. You can spin it anyway you want, but you are acting the very same way that you accuse ME of acting. THAT was my point. But of course, you will probably just respond to this by calling me all kinds of names and accussing me of all kinds of false things again. One track mind.

Umm, do you realize that you're arguing with someone who (unfortunately) is no longer here? Therefore, she won't be responding with any name calling and/or accusations. She won't be responding at all (again, I say, unfortunately).

 

[BlingBlingJoe]

Umm, do you realize that you're arguing with someone who (unfortunately) is no longer here? Therefore, she won't be responding with any name calling and/or accusations. She won't be responding at all (again, I say, unfortunately).

Snoopy died?

I didn't even know about that. I can't believe there hasn't been more talk of her passing, she was one the kindest posters we ever had on the DIS. This is so sad.

You should be ashamed of yourself whoever continues to argue with her last words.

 

[BlingBlingJoe]

I may be too late here, but does anyone know when the services are?

For all she has done for the DIS, I think we should do our part to be represented there.

I've pretty much been a lurker for many years, but this is just too sad guys.

Does anyone know how she passed?

 

[dis ms.]

Snoopy died?

Real life, no. DIS-life, yes.

I didn't even know about that. I can't believe there hasn't been more talk of her passing,

LOL. There's been lots of talk about it, the conversations just end rather quickly. (I suspect you already know that, though. )