Why does Society Hate Families? Part II

“As for the decline of society..what decline? People live longer, are healthier, Discrimination is illegal (unless you're gay). Technology allows us to connect with others across the globe, diseases like polio have been wiped out....etc etc etc.
People having different kinds of families or relationships or ways of raising their children is not a decline, it's called democracy and how others chose to raise their children or with whom they chose to raise their children is no one else's business.”

Click to expand...

So because they live longer means there are no problems? There are more diseases, certainly more sexually transmitted diseases than ever before. Polio gone, AIDS and HIV here taking millions of lives every year. Suicide rates especially for teens and young adults has risen. So have crime rates and rates of woman raising children by themselves. In some ways technology is good and in other ways its bad, porn sites, illegal activities online…the loss of jobs to computers.

Oh yes there are different ways of raising families……. but are they all good? And who are they good for? Good for the children? Good for parents?

“Discussion is one thing, blame is another. From your posts it seems as if you are blaming all society's ills on women and their role in the family. The last comment is just childish.”

Click to expand...

And I don't mean to put the blame on anyone here really. I think the majority of parents do try to do the very best they can. But I truely think balance is the key. No child deserves to be raised primarily at day care facilities. Doesnt there have to be sacrifice somewhere?

Women play a very big role in society, one that no man can begin to match. Like it or not she is the one who gives birth to children. And with that act, brings responsibilities. Whose responsibility is it if a person has a child? If my neighbor has a child, does it become my responsibility to feed it, nurture it and take care of it? Does it become the responsibility of the school? the daycare? Does it mean anything anymore to be a mother? What are the responsibilites of a mother today? Has it changed over the years? Have childrens needs changed?

“No choosing to raise your child alone or with whatever kind of family you have is no one's business. Harming a child is a different story, sad that you can't see that.”

Click to expand...

Well many have different opinions as to what harms children today.

“We entered a new era where society placed a premium on protecting children's innocence and acknowledging their vulnerability.”

Click to expand...

Today society really places a premium on children and doesn’t seem to protect them at all. IMO they are used and abused in all sorts of ways. They aren’t even children anymore, they are treated from early childhood like adults. Children today are sexualized at much younger ages. Look at the magazines and television that they read and watch.

I remember watching Nelly win the Kids Nickelodeon Choice awards a few years back. I watched it on television with my niece. For those of you who don’t know Nelly, he is the one who wrote a song called Pimp Juice. I just could not believe my ears, so I Googled the song. Pimp Juice (She only wants me for my pimp juice) Thicky thick Gurls (Lookin like a lollipop waitin for the lick girl) Wrap Sumden (Weed is actually a medicine for me, you know)

I mean am I just out of it or what.......but isnt pimp juice sperm? :rofl

Kids!!!! And they voted for this guy as their favorite rapper. Can you believe any parent would even let their child listen to lyrics like this? And its on Nickelodeon. Don’t parents care? Kids are targets……..and sex is used to get them. Sex sells, its just tragic that kids are who the entertainment industry goes after.

Did you know they make thongs for girls that are 5 years old? why does a five year old need a thong?

“Now women had the means to limit the size of their families.’ Oh yes, now woman have the legal right to kill their unborn children.

I just.. dont.. know....... but I do know this. I thank God in heaven that my kids are the ages that they are, 22 and 25. I would hate to have very young children and be raising them in todays society.

It's really quite simple. We spend much more if we all live single. And we engage in much less critical thinking if the system forces everybody to work. So laws get passed to make large families living under one roof illegal. And we hope and pray for hurricanes to hit places like New Orleans. (For those of you who didn't know New Orleans had few car owners than the inhabitants of NYC. Most of the New Orleans people didn't work in taxable jobs. And large families spanning many generations was the norm. All of this is evil in the minds of a politician that gets his money from big business which gets it's money by forcing people into consumerism.)

Hi Mr. Troll :2wave:

Johnny_Utah said:

Hi Mr. Troll :2wave:

Click to expand...

Did you know that talking to yourself can be a symptom of premature senile dementia?

If he had said "Mr. and Mrs." he could have killed two birds in one brilliant tactical move!

Anticipation is everything Utah!

Doughgirl
I just.. dont.. know....... but I do know this. I thank God in heaven that my kids are the ages that they are, 22 and 25. I would hate to have very young children and be raising them in todays society.

Click to expand...

That would be us. Almost 2 and 3 1/2. Both girls. I see todays youth and the respect, or lack of, daily.

It is not as bad as it seems yet it is still a fright. Parents today do not seem to instill respect or tradition into their kids...it sucks.

This, wlong with other factors, is one of the prime reasons we are moving to overseas this summer. Not a hate of the USA or any political reason...it is social and environmental (our one daughters health). Anyway, America is hurting and it is only getting fatter and more pathetic.

1069 said:

Kids are in school all day from toddlerhood.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. I'd hardly call a five year old a toddler. You're assuming that the child will attend preschool; this is not always the case, and even when it is, most preschools do not operate on an all day schedule, nor do children always attend 5 days a week.

The last thing they need is some stay-at-home parent hanging over them constantly like a big dead goose, making their lives miserable.

Click to expand...

Oh yes, because us stay at home parents are just so intent on making our kids' lives miserable. Funny, I rather thought we stayed home to make our kids' lives the best possible.

Are you implying that stay at home parents don't allow their children much independence? In my observations and experiences, you couldn't be further from the truth.

I'm a proud working parent, and I think working parents set a positive example for their kids.

Click to expand...

And no one is arguing that point. But families where one parent stays home are also setting a positive example for their kids. They're showing that one parent cares enough about their well being and development to be there for them whenever needed...and the parent that works is showing that they care enough to provide a life that makes it possible for the other parent to be there when they cannot.

I've got no problem with SAHMs; everybody's free to do whatever they feel like, as long as it's logistically feasible.
But when they start judging me, there's a problem.

Click to expand...

Well, as has been demonstrated in other threads, and in this very post, you DO seem to have a problem with SAHMs. And you do quite a bit of judging of us. Do as I say, not as I do?

I love to work, which is fortunate, because I have to work, as do most parents.

Click to expand...

That's great for you. But more and more families are finding it possible to allow one parent to stay at home, while still providing enough income to pay the bills.

My kids have learned by example that there's no reason for adults not to work, unless they are invalids and can't work. Being a parent is no reason not to work; in fact, it's a reason to work even harder.

Click to expand...

Au contraire. There's a very big reason for a two parent household to have one parent not work: Their kids are a higher priority to them than providing countless luxuries. You imply that stay at home parents don't work; quite contrarily, we bust our butts to provide a loving environment for our families. We run our households with the efficiency of a CEO. Stay at home parents work just as hard, if not harder, than many folks out in the paying workforce. We work to produce good, smart, and productive members of tomorrow's world.

People need external structure to their lives in order to be happy and productive. Work provides that like nothing else I know of.

Click to expand...

Not really. My life is plenty structured, and I'm perfectly happy and rather productive. It depends upon individual personality, goals, and desires. You say you enjoy work, so obviously you find a level of structure, happiness, and productivity in your work. So do I....only, my work is not done for anyone other than my family.

I would not wish the life of a stay-at-home parent on anyone, although if some stay-at-home parents are happy with their situations, then I'm happy for them.

Click to expand...

If we're happy with our situation, then why wouldn't you wish our life on anyone? Just because staying home isn't suited to your personality, it's not some horrible life of imprisonment for the rest of us, which is what you seem to think.

More than 82% of women in the US are mothers; 72% of all mothers of minor children are in the labor force.*
Among college-educated women with infant children, 63% are currently in the labor force.*
Like I said in a previous post on this thread, it's not like anybody outside of weird, radical evangelical cults honestly believes that either children or society in general would benefit, either individually or collectively, if women were to retreat en masse from the public and private sector and return to being housewives.
When one finds oneself having to rely upon the likes of Doughgirl and DeeJayH to justify or validate one's position on the matter, I would think that any rational and intelligent human being would be forced to reevaluate the validity of that position.
There is no evidence that children fare better simply because their mothers are unemployed.
In fact, all evidence I've seen points to the contrary.
And society, quite simply, can't do without women in the workforce.



*source: United States Census Bureau

BodiSatva said:

That would be us. Almost 2 and 3 1/2. Both girls. I see todays youth and the respect, or lack of, daily.

It is not as bad as it seems yet it is still a fright. Parents today do not seem to instill respect or tradition into their kids...it sucks.

This, wlong with other factors, is one of the prime reasons we are moving to overseas this summer. Not a hate of the USA or any political reason...it is social and environmental (our one daughters health). Anyway, America is hurting and it is only getting fatter and more pathetic.

Click to expand...

You're leaving the country?! Geez...see ya later :2wave:

1069 said:

More than 82% of women in the US are mothers; 72% of all mothers of minor children are in the labor force.*
Among college-educated women with infant children, 63% are currently in the labor force.*
Like I said in a previous post on this thread, it's not like anybody outside of weird, radical evangelical cults honestly believes that either children or society in general would benefit, either individually or collectively, if women were to retreat en masse from the public and private sector and return to being housewives.
When one finds oneself having to rely upon the likes of Doughgirl and DeeJayH to justify or validate one's position on the matter, I would think that any rational and intelligent human being would be forced to reevaluate the validity of that position.
There is no evidence that children fare better simply because their mothers are unemployed.
In fact, all evidence I've seen points to the contrary.
And society, quite simply, can't do without women in the workforce.



*source: United States Census Bureau

Click to expand...

And yet, one has to wonder what those numbers will say in a couple of years when a new census is done? I know quite a few mothers, and a good majority of them stay home with their kids. None of us are part of "weird, radical evangelical cults", but we all certainly feel that we're doing the best we can for our kids by staying home. Motherhood is moving up in the ranks of womens' priorities, and more and more mothers are adopting attachment parenting philosophies, up to and including staying home with their children.

There's plenty of stuff out there that says children do better when a parent stays home with them...and as a side note, staying home does not automatically mean unemployed. Anyway, there's plenty of stuff out there that'll tell you sticking your kid in daycare is the way to go. If you look hard enough, you can find something to support any side of any issue. But the point remains that stay at home moms are doing what is best for THEIR family, just like working mothers are doing what works best for THEIR family. Why can't you just concede that point? Just because you don't agree with the stay at home lifestyle, why do you continue to villify stay at home mothers and attempt to make us feel worthless and like we're doing something wrong? That attitude isn't helping anyone, and just makes you look bitter, and, well...mean.

Also....allow me to put on my mod hat for a moment.

As for your comment about doughgirl and DeeJayH....very thin line you're treading; I'd advise you to back off from that line of posting.

Well, my wife is working as a research administrator while working on her P.H.D.

I own a small business.

We have a 25year old who has a degree in psychology and is currently working on on an accounting degree. We also have a 6 year old who is the apple of everybody's eye.

Both children are well adgusted, the first following a much less wild path in my life than did I at the same age. My own parents are very traditional and conservative, yet I ended up dropping out of school to pursue my interests in drug taking, hitchhiking and communal living. Now,certainly I am offering nothing but anecdotal accounts here, but if one approaches child rearing based upon what is best for the child, I am not convinced that mothers staying home is really the key to raising kids successfully.

In our case, we do a lot of juggling of time, and with both boys, our pattern involved my taking the kids to work with me on occasion, my wife bringing work and school home with her quite a bit, and with the boys in day care less than full time. It's not as if we just parked the kids in a holding pen, as we chose the situations very carefully, limited the number of hours to what was necessary, and stayed very involved. Now,not every family has the luxury of engaging in the sort of juggling as we did, since we are in control of our time more than some people, but it still worked for us and worked well. Heck, with my having what is essentially two "only children", the hours spent in daycare and preschool provided valuble socialization that we would not have had otherwise.

My view towards families, is that a family is not defined by structure, but by attitudes, and there are many different paths people can take that arrive at the same destination.

It's true that when my children were small, in the early 90s, society was more supportive of working mothers than it is today... at least, it expressed general, theoretical support and approval for the idea of mothers having jobs (for whatever that's worth, without paid parental leave, government-subsidized child care, and other benefits which every other country in the industrialized world provides, and which would offer practical support to working parents).
The tide of social approval has now turned on working mothers; fortunately, my kids are almost grown up now, and it would be difficult for even a rabid conservative to justify encouraging me to stay home at this point; the money I earn is largely applied toward their college funds and my retirement.
Today, unemployed mothers are held up as the paragon of responsible womanhood- up to and including mothers whose children have long since grown up and left the nest- and working women are villified.

All of this is beside the point; one need only listen to it if one gives a crap what others think, which I don't, particularly.
I do follow social trends and statistics, out of curiosity to see which way the wind's blowing and what the future might bring, but that's about it.
And what I see is a lot of sensationalized yammering about how women are now "sacrificing" their careers to do what's "best" for their children, ie remaining unemployed.
But in reality, I don't see this happening. I see more women than ever in the workforce; and most of them, like most women anywhere, are mothers.

"Ever since 1970 the mainstream media have been pronouncing the death of feminism and reporting that working women have returned home to care for their children. Now such stories describe, based on scraps of anecdotal data, how elite (predominantly white) women are "choosing" to "opt out," ditching their career opportunities in favor of home and children or to care for aging parents. In 2000 Ellen Galinsky, president of the Families and Work Institute in New York, wearily responded to reporters, "I still meet people all the time who believe that the trend has turned, that more women are staying home with their kids, that there are going to be fewer dual-income families. But it's just not true."

Such contentious stories conveniently mask the reality that most women have to work, regardless of their preference. They also obscure the fact that an absence of quality, affordable childcare and flexible working hours, among other family-friendly policies, greatly contributes to women's so-called "choice" to stay at home.

In the past few years, a series of sensational stories have pitted stay-at-home mothers against "working women" in what the media coyly call the "mommy wars." When the New York Times ran a story on the controversy, one woman wrote the editor, "The word 'choice' has been used...as a euphemism for unpaid labor, with no job security, no health or vacation benefits and no retirement plans. No wonder men are not clamoring for this 'choice.' Many jobs in the workplace also involve drudgery, but do not leave one financially dependent on another person." *

There it is. Most women- like most men- have to work.
And those who remain unemployed often do so for lack of an alternative, not by "choice".
This is the reality.
Yet men, including those who have children, are encouraged to work guilt-free, encouraged to enjoy their work and find it fulfilling, encouraged to take pride in their contribution to society.
Women are grudgingly permitted to work, on the condition that they at least pretend that they hate it and feel awful about it, that they believe they are neglecting their children by not remaining unemployed, that only compelled by direst necessity do they ever step foot outside the doors of their homes and into the larger world, and that if they had their way, they'd remain housewives, rather than 'neglecting" their children.
These are the terms under which society, today, permits women to leave their homes and join the world.
These were not the terms a decade and a half ago, when my children were small and I was joining the workforce.
I feel very badly for young mothers today, and I want to offer them encouragement.
I want to tell them to reject those terms, those labels, that stigma. I want to tell them to do what they have to do, without guilt... and to enjoy it and feel proud of it, just like men do- also without guilt.
I want to tell them that they're amazing, balancing work and parenting, and they are appreciated.
I want to tell them that they are needed- that society needs their hard work, their skills.... that no, the world would not- repeat: WOULD NOT- be a better place if they all just left the work force, went home, shut their doors, and watched Barney videos with their kids.
Just as their kids need them, society also needs them. Society would suffer and possibly collapse, if women collectively left the work force and retreated to their homes to be housewives.
We're keeping this ship afloat.
Mothers, don't let anybody tell you different and don't let anybody, for one second, tell you that you're tolerated in the workplace on sufferance, and that society or your children would be better served if you just went home. It's bullshit.
Love your kids, love your job, love your life, love yourself, and be proud.
And above all, learn to suspect the motives and detect the hidden agendas of any individual or institution who would tell you otherwise.


* link

1069

LOL! My wife stays at home by Choice...as does EVERY SINGLE ONE OF HER FRIENDS!
We are not rich by any means either and neither are they...

It is easily done...
It is realistic...

It is the healthier choice for the kids and the family...

Instead of putting down "Stay at Home" Mothers in an effort to empower yourself and justify your decisions and need to work...

Why don't you listen to what "Stay at Home" Mothers and families are saying and stop assuming with your ridiculous "Barney Video" crap and learn something...

OK...

Women are in the workforce and that is fine...

But society and you seem to value this more than structure and stability in the family that would benefit the children, and consequently the family, more than just the parents...

That is all... :2razz:

BodiSatva said:

1069

Instead of putting down "Stay at Home" Mothers in an effort to empower yourself and justify your decisions...

Why don't you listen to what "Stay at Home" Mothers and families are saying and stop assuming with your ridiculous "Barney Video" crap...

OK...

Women are in the workforce and that is fine...

But society and you seem to value this more than structure and stability in the family that would benefit the children, and consequently the family, more than just the parents...

That is all... :2razz:

Click to expand...

No, that is not "all".
There is nothing "beneficial" to families, to children, to society, or to women themselves about women recusing themselves from contributing to the broader world of work and society and remaining unemployed.
Most are not doing it by "choice" anyway, but for lack of state and federally-funded benefits and basic support services for working parents, which every other civilized nation in the world provides.
Other nations recognize the value of women's contributions- beyond their biological functions, their ability to produce and nurture offspring, which they have always done and will always continue to do, regardless.

Further, most mothers work, and this is also not a "choice" for very many of them, and there is nothing "beneficial" about social attitudes which suggest that they are failures rather than successes for working and raising children at the same time, or that children, families, or society in general would be better served if they just went away, or that they can best "contribute" by staying at home unemployed.

It's bullshit. It's misogyny.
I urge women to reject it.

1069

There is nothing "beneficial" to families, to children, to society, or to women themselves about women recusing themselves from contributing to the broader world of work and society and remaining unemployed.

Click to expand...

That word alone indicates that you are unwilling to look at the other side with open eyes. I will continue on the slim chance that you are actually an open person.

I am not saying that working women are bad. Relax.

We own are own business that my wife started. I have seen both sides of this situation. Most of what you seem unable to face is that for many it is a mind-set. It is psychology and how people look at it dictates how they respond.

I am saying that more quality time with your kid is better than less. That is just how it is. It is better for the kids. This is the optimal situation...to be included in the family and circle rather than to not.

It is also better for society since what you will find is better adjusted adults since, as children, their needs will be met as opposed to not met.

Surely this is understandable?

This is what my wife does and this is what Stace apparently does.

Not just MORE time...but MORE time that is QUALITY TIME.

Two parent households do not have to have two incomes. They don't. How do I know that this is a fact? We do it. If we can do it, then others can do it (random variables aside, since there are always variables.) This is just simple logic.

The whole thing that you just seem to be unwilling to talk about is "What is best for the children and the family". You seem stuck on what is best for you, or what was mandatory at any rate. You seem as if you won't accept any other possibilities than the situation that you had to face, and that is unfortunate.

Do you really think that, given the choice, it is better for mother's to work and see less of their kids? This is what you have been saying, isn't it?

You seem to look down upon mothers like Stace, and that seems unreasonable...

I am saying that more quality time with your kid is better than less. That is just how it is. It is better for the kids.

Click to expand...

Oh, really?
I hadn't thought of that; nor, I'm sure, had any other working mom in history.
See, here I was wasting my free time getting pedicures and squandering my evenings attending rated R movies and dancing the night away in 18-and-over bars. :doh
Spending quality time with my family never occurred to me.
Thank you, Bodisa-whatever. Thank you, from the bottom of my heart. You've opened my eyes to the truth. I'm a convert.
I understand it all, now.

Surely this is understandable?

Click to expand...

It is now.
Quality time.
Wait, wait... lemme get a pen and write that down.
Q.... U.....A.... L.... Quality. Quality time.

Okay, got it.

Thanks again.
You've changed my life, my entire approach to childrearing.

Two parent households do not have to have two incomes. They don't. How do I know that this is a fact? We do it. If we can do it, then others can do it (random variables aside, since there are always variables.) This is just simple logic.

Click to expand...

Well, it's "simple", at any rate.
"Logic"? Not so much.

If one unemployed parent is good, wouldn't two be better?
If not, why not?
Shall I produce evidence that it's been done, ergo it is logistically feasible?

Wow....

Am I to understand from some people's posts here that I'm "selfish" for being an unmarried, childless woman in her 30s? That I'm a detriment to society for desiring to live my life the way I want and do the things I want to do as opposed to just accepting my "role" as society's breeding machine?

In this day and age, I must say I am sufficiently surprised (and appalled) at such statements and/or implications.

Yeah, I guess it is selfish of me to want to enjoy my life and do the things I want to do... to travel to the places I want to travel to... to experience all the things I want to experience. It is after all MY life, why shouldn't I try to enjoy it? Why should I sacrifice everything I want just so I can be molded into what someone else thinks I should be? Yeah, I guess it is selfish... but you know what? I really don't give a flying hoot if someone thinks it's selfish. It's my life and I'll do with it what I want.

Aside from that obvious fact, it's better for my future children if I do these things I want to do now before having them so that when I DO have them, I don't feel resentment. I want to be able to both emotionally and financially support my child when I finally decide it's time. I want to be ready and willing to make the sacrifices that are necessary for raising a child. I want to have experiences and the wisdom gained from them to impart to my child. I want to be able to teach them all about the things I've done, the places I've been, the fun that I've had and encourage them to do the same. I want to be able to talk to them from personal experience about things they hear, or see, or read. Is that "selfish" too?

rivrrat said:

Wow....

Am I to understand from some people's posts here that I'm "selfish" for being an unmarried, childless woman in her 30s? That I'm a detriment to society for desiring to live my life the way I want and do the things I want to do as opposed to just accepting my "role" as society's breeding machine?

In this day and age, I must say I am sufficiently surprised (and appalled) at such statements and/or implications.

Yeah, I guess it is selfish of me to want to enjoy my life and do the things I want to do... to travel to the places I want to travel to... to experience all the things I want to experience. It is after all MY life, why shouldn't I try to enjoy it? Why should I sacrifice everything I want just so I can be molded into what someone else thinks I should be? Yeah, I guess it is selfish... but you know what? I really don't give a flying hoot if someone thinks it's selfish. It's my life and I'll do with it what I want.

Aside from that obvious fact, it's better for my future children if I do these things I want to do now before having them so that when I DO have them, I don't feel resentment. I want to be able to both emotionally and financially support my child when I finally decide it's time. I want to be ready and willing to make the sacrifices that are necessary for raising a child. I want to have experiences and the wisdom gained from them to impart to my child. I want to be able to teach them all about the things I've done, the places I've been, the fun that I've had and encourage them to do the same. I want to be able to talk to them from personal experience about things they hear, or see, or read. Is that "selfish" too?

Click to expand...

Meh. Shaddup and breed. /smacks rivrrat :beat

Off-topic, but I too adore the Marquis (erm... as far as literature goes). Doesn't he have the coolest quotes ever?

rivrrat said:

Wow....

Am I to understand from some people's posts here that I'm "selfish" for being an unmarried, childless woman in her 30s? That I'm a detriment to society for desiring to live my life the way I want and do the things I want to do as opposed to just accepting my "role" as society's breeding machine?

In this day and age, I must say I am sufficiently surprised (and appalled) at such statements and/or implications.

Yeah, I guess it is selfish of me to want to enjoy my life and do the things I want to do... to travel to the places I want to travel to... to experience all the things I want to experience. It is after all MY life, why shouldn't I try to enjoy it? Why should I sacrifice everything I want just so I can be molded into what someone else thinks I should be? Yeah, I guess it is selfish... but you know what? I really don't give a flying hoot if someone thinks it's selfish. It's my life and I'll do with it what I want.

Aside from that obvious fact, it's better for my future children if I do these things I want to do now before having them so that when I DO have them, I don't feel resentment. I want to be able to both emotionally and financially support my child when I finally decide it's time. I want to be ready and willing to make the sacrifices that are necessary for raising a child. I want to have experiences and the wisdom gained from them to impart to my child. I want to be able to teach them all about the things I've done, the places I've been, the fun that I've had and encourage them to do the same. I want to be able to talk to them from personal experience about things they hear, or see, or read. Is that "selfish" too?

Click to expand...

Methinks you've misunderstood. Now, if you had kids already and weren't willing to make any sacrifices for them, that'd be selfish. But seeing as how you're getting things out of the way now, so that you can provide a good life for a child....I'd call that being responsible.

1069 said:

Meh. Shaddup and breed. /smacks rivrrat :beat

Off-topic, but I too adore the Marquis (erm... as far as literature goes). Doesn't he have the coolest quotes ever?

Click to expand...

Yup, he's one of my absolute favs :mrgreen:

1069

Oh, really?
I hadn't thought of that; nor, I'm sure, had any other working mom in history.

I didn't say that you had never thought of that now...did I? :roll:

See, here I was wasting my free time getting pedicures and squandering my evenings attending rated R movies and dancing the night away in 18-and-over bars. Quite being ridiculous...nobody has ever said insinuated anything remotely like that...so theatrical!

Spending quality time with my family never occurred to me. clever
Thank you, Bodisa-whatever. Thank you, from the bottom of my heart. You've opened my eyes to the truth. I'm a convert. Are you ready to communicate openly now? Good.
I understand it all, now.

Click to expand...

Not by a long shot...but none of us do, so why do you persist in acting like a foolish?

I know that you aren't stupid... at least I think that you aren't. Chill out...I know you don't care about anything that I would say, but that was just a joke.

I am wondering why you are refusing to accept this as our point though... now that I do know that you have thought of this before... hmmm...?

It is now.
Quality time.
Wait, wait... lemme get a pen and write that down.
Q.... U.....A.... L.... Quality. Quality time.

Okay, got it.

Click to expand...

Your attempt at wit is boring since you are unwilling to even address what I am saying. I addressed your point...what you say is valid as well. There are many valid points, but you seem to only think that your view is correct and that what you think is best for all. That is fine...not everybody sees the "Big Picture".

Thanks again.
You've changed my life, my entire approach to childrearing.

Click to expand...

So melodramatic... What are you afraid of?

Why do you dislike people that think differently than you?
Why are you demeaning to the women that you should be helping, according to your logic?
Why do you support abandoning children?
Why do you support fragmenting the family?

Why are you filled with contempt (i.e. Hate) for those that see things differently than you?

From the onset, you have attacked me.

I initially played along and thought that you were just a bitch.
I then realized that you had a bit more intelligence than I originally thought.
Now all I see is your anger.

You can disguise it any way that you like, it is still a core of anger.

Angry at what you were dished in life? Who knows? You are the only person that can ultimately answer that...

Unless you start to communicate effectively we won't achieve anything substantial though...

Well, it's "simple", at any rate.
"Logic"? Not so much.

Click to expand...

That was the simplest form of logic...sorry if you are unwilling to see it.

If one unemployed parent is good, wouldn't two be better?

Click to expand...

Unemployed? Oh Brother... Like the parent is "looking" for work... :roll:

Will you accept one point? That the parent made a "Choice" to stay at home?

If not, why not?
Shall I produce evidence that it's been done, ergo it is logistically feasible?

Click to expand...

Of course it is logically feasable. What I said was equally as "logically feasable". You seem to love attacking what is different.

I question...
You attack...

I embrace understanding and communication...
You embrace hositlity and and a defensive attitude...

BodiSatva
Two parent households do not have to have two incomes. They don't. How do I know that this is a fact? We do it. If we can do it, then others can do it (random variables aside, since there are always variables.) This is just simple logic.

Click to expand...

So...let's try this again.

By your own admission, two parent households do not need two incomes, in fact, you say correctly that they don't even need one (at least this is possible for some, at any rate). Personally, we can get by quite easily on one medium sized income.

So you insult me...
Incorrectly assess my logic...
Contradict yourself....
Inadvertantly back up my logic with parallel logic...
And what will we see?
Will you come full circle back to being hostile again?
It is your choice.
:2razz:

You seem to love attacking what is different.

Click to expand...

If irony were avocados, we'd all be eating a lot of guacamole right about now.

Originally Posted by rivrrat
Wow....

Am I to understand from some people's posts here that I'm "selfish" for being an unmarried, childless woman in her 30s? That I'm a detriment to society for desiring to live my life the way I want and do the things I want to do as opposed to just accepting my "role" as society's breeding machine?

Click to expand...

Nope. Defensiveness leads to communication breakdown.

You must seek Understanding in order to be Aware...

Perhaps you should read some of that stuff again... :2razz:

Am I to understand from some people's posts here that I'm "selfish" for being an unmarried, childless woman in her 30s?...

Yeah, I guess it is selfish of me to want to enjoy my life and do the things I want to do... to travel to the places I want to travel to... to experience all the things I want to experience. It is after all MY life, why shouldn't I try to enjoy it? Why should I sacrifice everything I want just so I can be molded into what someone else thinks I should be? Yeah, I guess it is selfish... but you know what? I really don't give a flying hoot if someone thinks it's selfish.

It's my life and I'll do with it what I want...

Click to expand...

Wow! LOL! That was pretty amazing... total contradictions...

Anyway. There are varying degrees of selfishness. What you are doing is selfish. We are ALL selfish to a degree. You don't have kids... you can do what you like.

The point that you are missing for some reason, and perhaps it is because you don't have kids, is that once you have kids you should do what is BEST FOR THE CHILDREN as well as what is best for the family.

If you had kids and expressed that attitude above, I would be extremely worried for your children. :lol:

Aside from that obvious fact, it's better for my future children if I do these things I want to do now before having them so that when I DO have them, I don't feel resentment.

Click to expand...

That is one way to look at it. I think exactly the opposite. I think that there is no waiting until the "Right" time to have kids. If you think that you would have resentment towards your kids for them keeping you from "travel" and such, then PLEASE DO NOT HAVE CHILDREN!!!

OMG!

You and 1069! Sacrifice! Resentment! Priority of Careers!

When your Priority is to have kids and love them...then have kids, until then you are not ready.

I want to be able to both emotionally and financially support my child when I finally decide it's time. I want to be ready and willing to make the sacrifices that are necessary for raising a child. I want to have experiences and the wisdom gained from them to impart to my child. I want to be able to teach them all about the things I've done, the places I've been, the fun that I've had and encourage them to do the same. I want to be able to talk to them from personal experience about things they hear, or see, or read. Is that "selfish" too?

Click to expand...

In essence...yes.

You can do ALL OF THOSE THINGS with kids. How do I know that this is a fact! We do it! Simple logic...that is the stuff that really confuses 1069! LOL!

We travel...get this, WITH OUR KIDS! All over the place.

Here is the thing that you guys don't seem to get.

INCLUSION!

We INCLUDE our kids in our adventures. We don't have them and THEN sit back and tell them about them later. "Gee, I am an old man now and I can't shoot hoops with you son, being 56 when your oldest graduates High-School can do that, but when I was younger...DAMN! I had a great time!" LOL!

Can you imagine? I see these old parents all over the place. BMW's. Hawaiian vacations. Huge house. But they don't spend any time with their kids. They spent so much time getting the things that they thought that they needed in order to have kids that they missed the point ... Kids do not need all of that crap. They need parents that are with them, not out maintaining some level of life that they didn't even need i nthe first place. THAT is my point.

If you are unlcear as to anything that I said, just ask.

If I seemed rude towards you or if I did not seem open, it is because I am goofing around with humor at the same time that I am serious with worry for kids.

I don't want to get off on the wrong foor with you since this is a passionate topic.

Please don't go 1069 on me... :rofl

I hope for her, and she tries to enlist people to her cause, but I am not expecting any real change...

rivrrat , do what you think is best and if you have a solid core and are able to adapt, you will find your path and do what is best for you and your children.

Take it easy.