NationStates Jolt Archive

You know, that could describe half the threads on this forum, really. People seem to like to get angry, and whether or not there's actually anything to be angry about is irrelevant.
I could definitely plead guilty to that more than a few times on these forums. I think I'm learning though.

I get the impression you missed the context of this. The poster Dempublicents was responding to seemed to believe that returning to work shortly after giving birth would cause some sort of serious health issue. I'm pretty sure Dem's point was along the lines of "If anything was going to cause a health issue, it would be trying to spend the entirety of a maternity leave 'recovering' from giving birth instead of getting back up and doing things, whatever those things may be."

I'm sure she'll correct me if I've misinterpreted her, but I'm 99% certain she wasn't trying to say that mothers are lazy. :)


No, I did not miss the context, Dem has made similar remarks on the same subject in this thread with me earlier, she's stateing it more brazenly now though.

I'm quite certain that she isn't trying to say that mothers are lazy.

No, I did not miss the context, Dem has made similar remarks on the same subject in this thread with me earlier, she's stateing it more brazenly now though.

I'm quite certain that she isn't trying to say that mothers are lazy.
Nobody is saying that the parent raising the child and doing the household chores is lazy.

Nobody is saying that the parent raising the child and doing the household chores is lazy.


Do you agree with Dem that women have no need for time off for pregnancy, that maternity leave is for relaxing "or what have you" and that maternity leave leads to sedentary women that eat too much?

Do you agree with Dem that women have no need for time off for pregnancy, that maternity leave is for relaxing "or what have you" and that maternity leave leads to sedentary women that eat too much?
Maternity leave is of course necessary. I really doubt that that Dem was saying that a woman who has just given birth should go from the hospital straight to work.

Maybe if they had guns...

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y184/mugenmanxr/mindy004.jpg

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y184/mugenmanxr/mindy003.jpg

Maybe if they had guns...

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y184/mugenmanxr/mindy004.jpg

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y184/mugenmanxr/mindy003.jpg
Got any naked girls with guns while you're at it? You could really start to insult if you tried.

Got any naked girls with guns while you're at it? You could really start to insult if you tried.
Plenty, but that would be a violation of the TOS

Maternity leave is of course necessary. I really doubt that that Dem was saying that a woman who has just given birth should go from the hospital straight to work.


You doubt? Let's take a peek then:

Not necessarily. I know many women who took no time off at all for pregnancy or birth. Unless there are complications with the pregnancy or your job is a rather dangerous one, there really is no reason to take time off before birth, and time after birth, while certainly a good idea, is an equally good idea for *both* parents.



These women gave birth and then went to work the next day. At most, a day of work was missed. Often not even that. I know more than one woman who worked, went into labor and gave birth, then went back to work.



Yes, actually, I do. In a pregnancy without complications, there is generally no reason that a woman cannot be up on her feet and working right up until birth, and then after a good night's sleep after birth. A woman who has to have a C-section will obviously need a little more recovery time, but even then, the *necessary* recovery time is probably on the order of a week.



You really think women in the past were on their backs for weeks after a pregnancy? The reality is that most women, if necessary, could be back to work the day after they give birth.



To be fair, you're right, she didn't say go straight from the hospital to work, she's willing to grant them at least one night's rest and then they get back to work.

You doubt? Let's take a peek then:










To be fair, you're right, she didn't say go straight from the hospital to work, she's willing to grant them at least one night's rest and then they get back to work.
While I wouldn't stop any women who chose to do that and would even support them if they chose it, I wouldn't expect them to do that or even suggest it. Dem is the only one who can clear this up as far as how she feels.

While I wouldn't stop any women who chose to do that and would even support them if they chose it, I wouldn't expect them to do that or even suggest it. Dem is the only one who can clear this up as far as how she feels.


??

Well, I quoted Dem, no one else.

??

Well, I quoted Dem, no one else.
Yeah, I'm saying if what you are indicating is what she meant, I disagree.

Yeah, I'm saying if what you are indicating is what she meant, I disagree.


I'm trying very hard not to indicate, I quoted her words with little commentary and tried to maintain her context, the only way to do more would be to go back in the thread and read the posts in their entirety.
You're looking for page 11-12 on default settings, the post numbers are in the 160 to 170 range if you so wish.

The goals of feminism patently haven't been fully realised, especially outside of the West. Granted, great strides have been made and women have many, many more choices now than they have at any point in recorded history, but you only have to look at the nature of the over-arching raunch & celebrity cultures to see how far we have to go. The sad part of all this is that women are colluding in their own debasement (not to say that men aren't also debased).

The goals of feminism patently haven't been fully realised, especially outside of the West. Granted, great strides have been made and women have many, many more choices now than they have at any point in recorded history, but you only have to look at the nature of the over-arching raunch & celebrity cultures to see how far we have to go. The sad part of all this is that women are colluding in their own debasement (not to say that men aren't also debased).
You should check out the book Pornified.

You should check out the book Pornified.
I intend to read Ariel Levy's new book - Female Chauvinist Pigs - at some point, but I'll have a look out for this one too, thanks.

I should clarify that I don't mind many aspects of 'raunch culture'. What I find objectionable is that it's the dominant force. It all ties in with the dehumanising nature of commodification and commercialism. Cheap and tawdry.

I intend to read Ariel Levy's new book - Female Chauvinist Pigs - at some point, but I'll have a look out for this one too, thanks.

I should clarify that I don't mind many aspects of 'raunch culture'. What I find objectionable is that it's the dominant force. It all ties in with the dehumanising nature of commodification and commercialism. Cheap and tawdry.
My girlfriend read one of the two, can't remember which. I read through a few chapters of each.

It's the girls gone wild type thing that I really am against.

My girlfriend read one of the two, can't remember which. I read through a few chapters of each.

It's the girls gone wild type thing that I really am against.
Ugh. I heard about that for the first time a couple of days ago. Highlights how female self-objectification and the pursuit of fame and celebrity are dove-tailing.

Ugh. I heard about that for the first time a couple of days ago. Highlights how female self-objectification and the pursuit of fame and celebrity are dove-tailing.
The bad part is how they feel it "empowers" them. Breasts are powerful things, I'll admit, but showing them off when you're half off your ass drunk and in return for beads must fall under an abuse of power.

To be fair, you're right, she didn't say go straight from the hospital to work, she's willing to grant them at least one night's rest and then they get back to work.

I'm not Dempublicents, and I can't guarantee that I'm interpreting her posts correctly, but it seems to be that you left out a very important quote from those posts of hers you're referencing:

Immediately after birth, if at all possible, *both* parents should take off for bonding time. This is why many feminists (*gasp*) support both maternity and paternity leave.

This ought, at least, to guarantee that she's not saying "new mothers are lazy slobs who shouldn't take off work at all." I'm pretty sure that her actual point was that there is no physical reason why the average woman would need six weeks after giving birth to "recover," but some darn good emotional reasons why both parents should have the option to stay home and spend time with their new baby. This seems eminently reasonable to me.

You show me the men who are willing to stay home and do the childrearing, and then we'll talk about choice.

Here's one. And I'd love to do it.

However, I agree there is still an issue in both directions. Many of us who would like to stay at home and care for our children know we will have a difficult time explaining it to future employers, to our friends, to our families. The general view of a man who is caring for his children is that he's an unemployed bum. It cuts both ways and it's all crap.

I think the solution is for as many as us as possible to simply do what we feel is most beneficial to our happiness, to our families, to our careers without consideration for what others think of it. Like interracial marriage and such other 'anomolies', we will destroy their preconceptions by exposure.

I'm not Dempublicents, and I can't guarantee that I'm interpreting her posts correctly, but it seems to be that you left out a very important quote from those posts of hers you're referencing:



This ought, at least, to guarantee that she's not saying "new mothers are lazy slobs who shouldn't take off work at all." I'm pretty sure that her actual point was that there is no physical reason why the average woman would need six weeks after giving birth to "recover," but some darn good emotional reasons why both parents should have the option to stay home and spend time with their new baby. This seems eminently reasonable to me.


1. Yes, Dem stated she supports parental leave, for both parents, in order to emotionally bond with children, that is not the issue that I contend with Dem on and thus it didn't make it into the quotes.

2. I didn't say "new mothers are lazy slobs who shouldn't take off work at all." Dem didn't say "new mothers are lazy slobs who shouldn't take off work at all." Why are you saying "new mothers are lazy slobs who shouldn't take off work at all."?
The quote feature is an excellent tool to capture what someone is actually saying when you want to respond to it.

3. A point she made, which I strongly disagree with and you apparently are now voicing agreement with is that women have NO PHYSICAL reason for time off after giving birth.
It may be eminently reasonable to you and Dem I guess, but not to any woman I'm aware of that has actually given birth. My wife had 3 normal pregnancies, her recovery time was drastically different for all 3, but even after her best one, there was no way she was in physical shape to return to WORK the very next day.
If returning to work the next day is normal, then I'm not acquainted with normal people.

I'm not sure you're aware of it, but you seem to slide your arguments around modern times and primitive cultures whenever it best suits your points.

They are both important. Our current society seems to look at pregnancy as a disease, something that mothers *have* to stay home for, something that makes them super-delicate. In most cases, this is far from the actual case.

The concept of "housework" doesn't even exist in primitive or tribal cultures, yet you say it is only the current generation that recognises the need to share it.

Housework? No. But most primitive or tribal cultures did have "women's work" and "men's work."

To just relax?
Did you really just say that?

Actually, it was implied by the person I was responding to - a person who said that pregnant mothers need to stay at home, not work, and be "protected." Seems to me that he was implying that a pregnant woman needs to sit on her bum and do nothing all day.

You actually believe that mothers of newborns are just relaxing in a sedentary lifestyle and overeating???

(a) We weren't really talking about mothers of newborns. We were talking about pregnant women (who generally do eat more than they would if they were not pregnant). Read the post I was responding to.

(b) No, I absolutley do not think that, nor did I ever imply it.

I'm not even a mother/woman and I find that offensive. My wife on the other hand has a long string of expletives for you.

Then you and your wife need to learn to read the post that is being responded to before making silly assumptions.


I get the impression you missed the context of this. The poster Dempublicents was responding to seemed to believe that returning to work shortly after giving birth would cause some sort of serious health issue.

I was actually equally concerned with the ideas expressed in the previous post that a woman who works while pregnant will somehow be unhealthy. I was simply pointing out that a woman who does suddenly start a sedentary lifestyle while pregnant is probably *more* likely to have an unhealthy pregnancy than one who essentially continues her current one, albeit probably with a few changes.

No, I did not miss the context, Dem has made similar remarks on the same subject in this thread with me earlier, she's stateing it more brazenly now though.

I'm quite certain that she isn't trying to say that mothers are lazy.

Yes, my dear, you did miss the context. The poster I was responding to stated that a mother who works during and after pregnancy is going to cost a lot of money in healthcare. I was simply refuting that.

I have never once implied that mothers are lazy, or that they shouldn't stay home with infants. In fact, I have argued that both parents should have leave to bond with and take care of a newborn. All I did was refute the ridiculous statement that most women need to take maternity leave for their own health.

Do you agree with Dem that women have no need for time off for pregnancy, that maternity leave is for relaxing "or what have you" and that maternity leave leads to sedentary women that eat too much?

What the hell? None of this is anything I ever even came remotely close to saying!

Maternity (and paternity) leave are both things I think are absolutely necessary - in order for the parents to have plenty of time to bond with the newborn at a very critical time.

I never even suggested that maternity leave is for relaxing, or that it leads to sedentary women who eat too much. Please do stop making things up.

To be fair, you're right, she didn't say go straight from the hospital to work, she's willing to grant them at least one night's rest and then they get back to work.

Way to read things into my statements that weren't said.

I didn't say that a woman should go straight back to work. In fact, I have said the opposite NUMEROUS times. What I said was that, if need be, most women CAN go right back to work, and that I have known more than one woman who did it.

Feminism is essentially letting women do whatever the frig they want, period. End of story.

Well, see? Now we can all be friends again. Hope I didn't overstep my bounds, Dem.

Yes, my dear, you did miss the context. The poster I was responding to stated that a mother who works during and after pregnancy is going to cost a lot of money in healthcare. I was simply refuting that.

I have never once implied that mothers are lazy, or that they shouldn't stay home with infants. In fact, I have argued that both parents should have leave to bond with and take care of a newborn. All I did was refute the ridiculous statement that most women need to take maternity leave for their own health.

No dear I did not miss the context, you're not telling me anything new.

Most women DO need to recover physically after giving birth, it's ridiculous to assert that they don't.

Feminism reminds me of dodgeball and how sick it was that all of the girly-girls packed into little groups and barely participated while I worked my ass off and was good at it too. They screamed whenever anything came near them and wondered why I bossed them around. The only people I'm bossy towards are, in my opinion, my inferiors. Preps.

Feminism reminds me of dodgeball and how sick it was that all of the girly-girls packed into little groups and barely participated while I worked my ass off and was good at it too. They screamed whenever anything came near them and wondered why I bossed them around. The only people I'm bossy towards are, in my opinion, my inferiors. Preps.

How did you start out talking about feminism and then turn it into an explanation of why you're bossy?

How did you start out talking about feminism and then turn it into an explanation of why you're bossy?
I don't know. I'm a morning person, and it's late, so I'm losing my focus. And I'm suffering from caffeine withdrawal.

What the hell? None of this is anything I ever even came remotely close to saying!

Maternity (and paternity) leave are both things I think are absolutely necessary - in order for the parents to have plenty of time to bond with the newborn at a very critical time.

I never even suggested that maternity leave is for relaxing, or that it leads to sedentary women who eat too much. Please do stop making things up.


I quoted YOUR words Dem.
Argue with yourself if you're going to say now you didn't say it.

There's no reason to re-state the bonding issue, no one disagrees with you that taking time to bond with children is a good idea.

Way to read things into my statements that weren't said.

I didn't say that a woman should go straight back to work. In fact, I have said the opposite NUMEROUS times. What I said was that, if need be, most women CAN go right back to work, and that I have known more than one woman who did it.


I never used the word should either.
You also never said can.
You said things like "there really is no reason to take time off" aand again "there is generally no reason that a woman cannot be up on her feet and working right up until birth, and then after a good night's sleep after birth."

If there's no reason, then what does that mean for the women that DO take time to PHYSICALLY RECOVER after a normal pregancy and normal birth?

I quoted what you said, here's the entire exchange:

Not necessarily. I know many women who took no time off at all for pregnancy or birth. Unless there are complications with the pregnancy or your job is a rather dangerous one, there really is no reason to take time off before birth, and time after birth, while certainly a good idea, is an equally good idea for *both* parents.

These many women were lucky enough to give birth on the weekend and showed up for work on Monday???
And you consider that realistic?

Yes, actually, I do. In a pregnancy without complications, there is generally no reason that a woman cannot be up on her feet and working right up until birth, and then after a good night's sleep after birth. A woman who has to have a C-section will obviously need a little more recovery time, but even then, the *necessary* recovery time is probably on the order of a week.

They are both important. Our current society seems to look at pregnancy as a disease, something that mothers *have* to stay home for, something that makes them super-delicate. In most cases, this is far from the actual case.


Maybe your society does, mine doesn't.
Seriously, I feel like I'm in that new movie having a conversation with someone across a chasm of time.

Feminism reminds me of dodgeball and how sick it was that all of the girly-girls packed into little groups and barely participated while I worked my ass off and was good at it too. They screamed whenever anything came near them and wondered why I bossed them around. The only people I'm bossy towards are, in my opinion, my inferiors. Preps.

Hey, same here.

Most women DO need to recover physically after giving birth, it's ridiculous to assert that they don't.

Most people have to recover physically after a big workout too, but they don't physically need time off for it.

I never suggested that giving birth is not a physically demanding experience, but the fact of the matter remains that most women *can* go back to work the next day. Is it a good idea? No, I don't think so. Is it possible? Absolutely.

Meanwhile, it is incredibly clear that you did miss the context, as the context was not limited to after birth. The post I was responding to talked about women needing to quit working while pregnant as well, and the post you took so much issue with was responding to the idea that a pregnant woman should stop working or she will be a burden on the healtcare system.

I quoted YOUR words Dem.
Argue with yourself if you're going to say now you didn't say it.

Yes, my words which were in response to someone who said that a PREGNANT woman needed to quit working. If I say that a woman who leads a sedentary lifetstyle while pregnant is more likely to be unhealthy, how exactly does that translate into, "Women who take time off to take care of their children are lazy"?

I never used the word should either.
You also never said can.
You said things like "there really is no reason to take time off" aand again "there is generally no reason that a woman cannot be up on her feet and working right up until birth, and then after a good night's sleep after birth."

So I didn't say "can". Instead, I used "no reason that she cannot". In other words, most women *can* be up on their feet again. This doesn't mean that they should. Saying, "There is no reason that she cannot...." is the exact same thing as saying, "She can...."

If there's no reason, then what does that mean for the women that DO take time to PHYSICALLY RECOVER after a normal pregancy and normal birth?

It means that they are lucky enough to have that chance - and they don't have to get right back into work and such. Most of them still could have, but there is no reason to force them to do so.

What would you say about those who participate in a marathon or do something else that is physically demanding and then have a day or so to recover? I'd say good for them - it's great that they have that chance.

Hell, I have taken a half day or a day off after a very demanding presentation. I took a few days off from the lab before and after my qualifying exam because of the demands it placed on me. Could I have worked up to an hour before and been back in the lab an hour after? Certainly. But it was probably better that I didn't.

Maybe your society does, mine doesn't.

You yourself seem to. If you didn't view it as such, you would recognize the fact that it doesn't generally debilitate a woman, and you wouldn't be arguing that point with me.

Most people have to recover physically after a big workout too, but they don't physically need time off for it.



The fact that you can even attempt that comparison is indicative of how far out there your views are.

I've never heard of anyone either tearing genital flesh or having an episiotimy for a "big workout".

Giving birth is not equivalent to going for a long run.

The fact that you can even attempt that comparison is indicative of how far out there your views are.

I've never heard of anyone either tearing genital flesh or having an episiotimy for a "big workout".

Giving birth is not equivalent to going for a long run.

I never said they were equivalent. The fact that you keep trying to twist my words is indicative of the fact that you have nothing to actually argue with me.

There is a reason that I made the comparison to a marathon or something similar. And while genital tearing does not generally occur because of a marathon, all sorts of muscle tears, joint injuries, etc. can happen. A person may become severely dehydrated and need medical attention, etc.

Congratulations on demonstrating that you didn't even bother reading the majority of my post. It is extremely evident at this point that you are just arguing for the sake of arguing, rather than making any sort of actual point.

I never said they were equivalent. The fact that you keep trying to twist my words is indicative of the fact that you have nothing to actually argue with me.

There is a reason that I made the comparison to a marathon or something similar. And while genital tearing does not generally occur because of a marathon, all sorts of muscle tears, joint injuries, etc. can happen. A person may become severely dehydrated and need medical attention, etc.

Congratulations on demonstrating that you didn't even bother reading the majority of my post. It is extremely evident at this point that you are just arguing for the sake of arguing, rather than making any sort of actual point.
okay I haven't kept up, but tell me Dem you do know all the other stuff that women go through in postpartum right? none of it fun, none of it easy, most doctors tell you to take at least 3 weeks off because of the hell your body goes through.........

okay I haven't kept up, but tell me Dem you do know all the other stuff that women go through in postpartum right? none of it fun, none of it easy, most doctors tell you to take at least 3 weeks off because of the hell your body goes through.........

I've never heard the 3 weeks number, and it seems a bit high, but yes, I am well aware that pregnancy exacts all sorts of changes - both hormonal and physical. And I have never denied this, despite Snow Eaters' obvious intention to twist my words and lie about what I have and have not said.

The only thing I have said regarding this is that there is no physical reason that most postpartum women cannot return to work. I never said that it wasn't a good idea to take some time off. I never even suggested it. I simply pointed out that it is not a physical necessity in most healthy pregnancies.

I've never heard the 3 weeks number, and it seems a bit high, but yes, I am well aware that pregnancy exacts all sorts of changes - both hormonal and physical. And I have never denied this, despite Snow Eaters' obvious intention to twist my words and lie about what I have and have not said.

The only thing I have said regarding this is that there is no physical reason that most postpartum women cannot return to work. I never said that it wasn't a good idea to take some time off. I never even suggested it. I simply pointed out that it is not a physical necessity in most healthy pregnancies.
except for the losing of copious amounts of blood for up to 6 weeks postpartum, the risk of hemorage, and you know the whole nursing thing where even if you don't nurse you get full of milk and can get infected breasts if you don't pump.

except for the losing of copious amounts of blood for up to 6 weeks postpartum, the risk of hemorage, and you know the whole nursing thing where even if you don't nurse you get full of milk and can get infected breasts if you don't pump.
Well, even taking the three weeks number, or hell - three months for that matter, there is no reason why a woman cannot return to work if a father or other responsible adult is at home to care for the child.

Well, even taking the three weeks number, or hell - three months for that matter, there is no reason why a woman cannot return to work if a father or other responsible adult is at home to care for the child.
as soon as she is physically able, I have no problem with it. If I had the earning power of my husband I would leave his ass home with the kids in a heartbeat, in fact he graduates in May and I go back to school and that is the big goal.

as soon as she is physically able, I have no problem with it. If I had the earning power of my husband I would leave his ass home with the kids in a heartbeat, in fact he graduates in May and I go back to school and that is the big goal.
Cool.

I never said they were equivalent. The fact that you keep trying to twist my words is indicative of the fact that you have nothing to actually argue with me.



I'm arguing with you your ridiculous position that men and women are equally physically capable of returning to work after a child is born.
It is patently obvious that the woman, that PHYICALLY gave birth is generally requiring more than a good night's rest before returning to work.

But, because that doesn't fit your theory that men and women should stay home from work equally, you refuse to admit the obvious.
Yes, as we have ALL agreed, bonding time between parent of either gender and child is great, but if only one parent can be afforded, it only makes sense that the parent that in addition to wanting to bond with the child also needs some time to physically recover from the birth with be selected in the majority of cases.


And I have not twisted your words no matter how many times you want to say that, I merely quote you.

except for the losing of copious amounts of blood for up to 6 weeks postpartum, the risk of hemorage, and you know the whole nursing thing where even if you don't nurse you get full of milk and can get infected breasts if you don't pump.

Copious amounts of blood? I've studied quite a bit of biology and I've never heard that one.

And yes, there is a risk of hemorrhage, as there is with many medical conditions. There is a risk of hemorrhage after an abortion as well - roughly equivalent to the risk after giving birth, but women can have an abortion and return to work.

And a woman certainly can nurse/pump without losing working days. It's easier to carry off with some jobs than with others, but it is possible.

Once again, I am not saying that a woman should not take time off after birth. I am simply pointing out that it is not a physical necessity.


Well, even taking the three weeks number, or hell - three months for that matter, there is no reason why a woman cannot return to work if a father or other responsible adult is at home to care for the child.

Not to mention that, for at least three weeks, both parents should be given leave to stay at home with the child.

Not to mention that, for at least three weeks, both parents should be given leave to stay at home with the child.
Unless I had to, I don't know if I could deal with going to work while worrying about both my wife and my brand new kid.

I'm arguing with you your ridiculous position that men and women are equally physically capable of returning to work after a child is born.

And you have provided no evidence that most women, after healthy pregnancies and births, are physically incapable of returning to work.

But, because that doesn't fit your theory that men and women should stay home from work equally, you refuse to admit the obvious.

Once again, you are making things up. I never once said that men and women should stay home from work equally. I did say that both men and women should be granted leave after the birth of a newborn - something you didn't refute.

And I have not twisted your words no matter how many times you want to say that, I merely quote you.

Yes, you have, right down to outright lying in another thread. You quote me, and then state that the quote says something it clearly does not just for the sake of argument.

Unless I had to, I don't know if I could deal with going to work while worrying about both my wife and my brand new kid.
my husband stayed home with me for 3 weeks after both kids, we saved up his vacation time.

I just recently found out that's not the norm, it's sad :(

He also got up with the baby at night 10p-4am was his shift and I got anything after 4am.

that's also not the norm :(

I am glad I didn't get a crybaby husband, their big excuse is "I have to work all day" to which my husband replies "so does she!"

my husband stayed home with me for 3 weeks after both kids, we saved up his vacation time.

I just recently found out that's not the norm, it's sad :(

He also got up with the baby at night 10p-4am was his shift and I got anything after 4am.

that's also not the norm :(

I am glad I didn't get a crybaby husband, their big excuse is "I have to work all day" to which my husband replies "so does she!"
Oh, I'll be a crybaby about it :), but I think I'll be having some stiff competition.

my husband stayed home with me for 3 weeks after both kids, we saved up his vacation time.

I just recently found out that's not the norm, it's sad :(

But my point is that you shouldn't even have had to use vacation time.

Many places these days legally require up to 6 weeks of paid maternity leave. The argument is that a woman needs time to be home with her newborn, to take care of that newborn and bond with the child. My argument is that men should bond with their children as well, and should get paid paternity leave, much as women get paid maternity leave.

But my point is that you shouldn't even have had to use vacation time.

Many places these days legally require up to 6 weeks of paid maternity leave. The argument is that a woman needs time to be home with her newborn, to take care of that newborn and bond with the child. My argument is that men should bond with their children as well, and should get paid paternity leave, much as women get paid maternity leave.
oh yeah, I can jump on board with that, both parents should get paid leave, it's kinda mean to the woman not to offer it to the man.

my husband stayed home with me for 3 weeks after both kids, we saved up his vacation time.

I just recently found out that's not the norm, it's sad :(

He also got up with the baby at night 10p-4am was his shift and I got anything after 4am.

that's also not the norm :(

I am glad I didn't get a crybaby husband, their big excuse is "I have to work all day" to which my husband replies "so does she!"

I saved my vacation time, too - and took four weeks. I'd have taken longer, if I could. The first couple of weeks were hell for my wife... and it's mainly stupid stuff, like not being able to sit after an episiotomy... plus the fact that, while a newborn DOES sleep about 20 hours... he doesn't start at midnight and sleep till eight.

And yet, the mainstream would have you believe that not only did feminism 'win', it's gone much too far.

Hardly the case.

I'd disagree with that. Feminism has won its case. It has got laws in place which give equal rights to women, under law. However social expectations of women, while they have changed are still that they will care for their children in some aspect. But to change social expectations is very diffrent from changing laws. A government you can attack with a protest, but not society. What feminism has done which has gone to far is switch the mocking of men to the point where it has become unreasobale. Often in the media men are portrayed as balding, drunken, slobish idiots, who always need a women to save them.

Often in the media men are portrayed as balding, drunken, slobish idiots, who always need a women to save them.
Huh?

I'd disagree with that. Feminism has won its case. It has got laws in place which give equal rights to women, under law. However social expectations of women, while they have changed are still that they will care for their children in some aspect. But to change social expectations is very diffrent from changing laws. A government you can attack with a protest, but not society. What feminism has done which has gone to far is switch the mocking of men to the point where it has become unreasobale. Often in the media men are portrayed as balding, drunken, slobish idiots, who always need a women to save them.

I know a lot of men... and most of them qualify for at least two or three of "balding", "drunken", "slobbish" and "idiot".

Maybe feminism isn't the reason for this stereotype?

I know a lot of men... and most of them qualify for at least two or three of "balding", "drunken", "slobbish" and "idiot".

Maybe feminism isn't the reason for this stereotype?

Ya but y'all are from Georgia.

I know a lot of men... and most of them qualify for at least two or three of "balding", "drunken", "slobbish" and "idiot".

Maybe feminism isn't the reason for this stereotype?

I'm only one of them.

Ya but y'all are from Georgia.

No no... I live in Georgia... I'm very much NOT 'from' here.

I'm only one of them.

I'm working towards the 'balding', apparently... :)

It can. Mention it to the average girl. Watch her roll her eyes.

That's not to say she doesn't benefit from some of the freedoms it has won. But that fact is pushed away. And you must admit, an "uncool" movement can't be expected to generate much support for a follow-up. Much of it is in the hands of the EU labour rights lawyers now.

I actually rolled my eyes!

In France you have the 'paternity free weeks' it's paid, of course. The problem is that most of the time, men don't even know they can do it. I think the time accorded to the father is shorter than the one's accorded to the mother but it's because the time 'after the birth' is considered as a time the mother need to take forces, and to be ready to have an active life again. Then, the 'paid free weeks' start. That's why the time accorded to the father is shorter. Because he was not pregnant. So the law considers that while his wife is in hte hospital, he perfectly can work... I think we have more social laws like that in France, and we really love them... Not only for the laws about equality between men and women in the work.. But a lot of laws for the family. For the security in work...That's why we're always demonstrating and why we always have strikes: because we don't want to see our rights and priviledges supressed...

Take it a bit like this. (True story) I want to marry this girl, and she wants to marry me someday. The girl is definatly one of the smartest people I've ever met in my life, no bias, the girl is a genius. She's one of those toughy girls though that can take care of her self, etc. But when I ask her what she wants to do with her life, she says she wants to stay home with her/our kids. She could go to freaking Harvard if she so desired, but she'd rather stay home with her kids. Actually, I don't honestly believe her that she would, I think it comes from her Christianity (which I'm not all togather fond of, she's very religious, I'm not, it causes a bit of... friction) and from what I have seen, it's kind of taught that women stay home and take care of their families and men go out and work, and she wants to be a good little Christian. Personally, I think that's retarded, only I think Christianity in general is retarded, I don't care what she wants to do as long as she's happy, but I think she wants more for herself then sitting at home with a kid all day and just doesn't want to defy God/society/whatever. I tell her we don't have to actually have a baby, we can adopt one if she wants, I don't mind, and she says no, that God built her to make babies and thats what she was ultimatly ment to do. I get so frustrated with it, because I know her underlying dreams and ambitions, and she's basically throwing them out the window for something I consider stupid. Granted, that is her faith, and granted, not all Christian women lead that lifestyle. I wouldn't care what she wanted to do with her life, if I thought that was what she really wanted. She used to want to be an author, go to a nice fancy school, etc, and now all she says she's going to do is sit at home with the kids. That actually isn't a problem with me... as long as I believed her! I can feel her dissapointement, not that she has to raise kids, she wants to, and so do I, but only that she believes she can't do anything else, say, academic. She actually feels that because she's a woman she's basically designed to pop out babies for a man, and take care of them the rest of her life, and feels compelled by her religion to do only that. I try to explain to her that it doesn't need work like that and she just tells me to stop and gets all sad. I know she cares a lot about her religion, but I don't understand it, and worse, I don't like it, and I feel its stealing her dreams away from her, and she's letting it. She will be a good mother, I know that, and don't get me wrong, taking care of children is one of, if not the most important thing you could ever do, including go to the moon or whatever, I mean damn. I'll also be proud of her if she leads this life and is happy with it, but I'm just afraid she wont be happy. I feel like she's letting society screw her out of her dreams because she has a damn vagina. It's so silly, shit, now I'm depressed thinking about it. I fucking hate Christianity.

This less flourishing sphere is not the natural or moral responsibility only of women...

The choice is a false one, based on the realities of a half-revolutionized society. Once we recognize that, we can admit that the tools feminism offered women to escape the dilemma have failed...

Feminism is about quality of life and values for women. The idea that it is a choice to be a caregiver when everything around you is guiding you towards that, isn't much of a choice at all.
It is still a choice, their choice, with accompanying personal responsibility for the role one develops for themselves.

One avenue of attack that (perhaps) 'the tools of feminism' misses is to bring people out of the 'work force', as employees, and put them back in the home, in home-based businesses, as their own bosses. The idea is that if you make the home-based business a 'flourishing sphere', we can no longer count feminism as failed in that regard, or the quality of life for women diminished by being 'stuck' in the home, especially if they actually want to be there with their kids.

(My apologies if this has been discussed already. I didn't read the thread.)

It is still a choice, their choice, with accompanying personal responsibility for the role one develops for themselves.

One avenue of attack that (perhaps) 'the tools of feminism' misses is to bring people out of the 'work force', as employees, and put them back in the home, in home-based businesses, as their own bosses. The idea is that if you make the home-based business a 'flourishing sphere', we can no longer count feminism as failed in that regard, or the quality of life for women diminished by being 'stuck' in the home, especially if they actually want to be there with their kids.

(My apologies if this has been discussed already. I didn't read the thread.)
An all around good tactic that shouldn't be directed only to females.