PDA

View Full Version : Does women's liberation require social services such as child care services, ect?



Wei Wu Wei
11-16-2010, 10:44 AM
I hear a lot that true women's liberation that is possible in advanced societies is only possible through social services that cater to her biological and maternal needs.

The argument is usually that these are necessary in order for women to be able to fully participate in and run social and economic activity. There are millions and millions of intelligent, capable women. Many of them manage to miss common downfalls of men.

Would it be a huge boost for our society, productive and otherwise, to provide social services allowing all women a real equal opportunity at leadership positions in business, government, and social organization?

Bailey
11-16-2010, 11:03 AM
I hear a lot that true women's liberation that is possible in advanced societies is only possible through social services that cater to her biological and maternal needs.

The argument is usually that these are necessary in order for women to be able to fully participate in and run social and economic activity. There are millions and millions of intelligent, capable women. Many of them manage to miss common downfalls of men.

Would it be a huge boost for our society, productive and otherwise, to provide social services allowing all women a real equal opportunity at leadership positions in business, government, and social organization?

if they want to be truly liberated why do they need handouts? Just turning in one master for another.

AmPat
11-16-2010, 11:17 AM
I hear a lot that true women's liberation that is possible in advanced societies is only possible through social services that cater to her biological and maternal needs.

The argument is usually that these are necessary in order for women to be able to fully participate in and run social and economic activity. There are millions and millions of intelligent, capable women. Many of them manage to miss common downfalls of men.

Would it be a huge boost for our society, productive and otherwise, to provide social services allowing all women a real equal opportunity at leadership positions in business, government, and social organization?
Sarah Palin doesn't seem to need it.

noonwitch
11-16-2010, 11:25 AM
If a single woman is going to raise kids alone, she has 3 choices:

1. work and make a lot of money, so she can pay for the day care
2. get enough child support from the dad in order to stay at home and raise the kid
3. find a way to get the government to pay for day care until the kids are in school all day.


If two parents are raising the children together, well, scheduling becomes the issue.

Wei Wu Wei
11-16-2010, 12:04 PM
Those certainly are the choices available, and you are right it requires a lot of money to pay for day care because it's expensive.

Many countries consider child care an essential service in today's reality, a reality far different from those our grandparents faced.

Apocalypse
11-16-2010, 12:17 PM
I say we raise every ones taxes, especially on the middle class who enjoy a 3.1 TRILLION tax break that is bankrupting our nation forcing us to make cuts in Social Services that these women are now seeing taken away from them!

Wei Wu Wei
11-16-2010, 12:20 PM
I say we raise every ones taxes, especially on the middle class who enjoy a 3.1 TRILLION tax break that is bankrupting our nation forcing us to make cuts in Social Services that these women are now seeing taken away from them!

Right, the Republican approach.

NJCardFan
11-16-2010, 12:20 PM
I remember watching a program on History Channel or something like it about the Women's Liberation movement. They were showing old video of women being interviewed and they were getting divorces because they felt they didn't need their husbands and saying, "I love my husband, I just don't need him". Well, you can bet your ass that these women were asking for the moon and stars in spousal and child support. IMO, if there is no history of abuse or anything like that and the woman is seeking the dissolution of marriage, then she gets nothing in any form of monetary support. They can have equitable distribution of the marriage assets(house, car, stuff) but that's it.

AmPat
11-16-2010, 12:32 PM
Right, the Republican approach.

Right! The typical Idiot Liberal response.:rolleyes:

Rockntractor
11-16-2010, 12:37 PM
Right, the Republican approach.

You need an exorcism, I'll see if I can get a hold of Duzey.

Apocalypse
11-16-2010, 12:39 PM
Right, the Republican approach.

No..no..no..

I've finally have seen the liberal light! Taxes are the answer! But we can't get enough from the rich, and the GOP won't let us, so we can tax the poor and blame the GOP for their hurt!

To quote our brilliant party member.

"paying your taxes is a patriotic duty" ~ Biden

So we get the 47% of those who don't pay taxes to now pay them, and vala, all the tax money we need to pay for all these wonderful Government programs and we can blame the GOP for the hurt they feel.

I have seen the light!

noonwitch
11-16-2010, 12:46 PM
I remember watching a program on History Channel or something like it about the Women's Liberation movement. They were showing old video of women being interviewed and they were getting divorces because they felt they didn't need their husbands and saying, "I love my husband, I just don't need him". Well, you can bet your ass that these women were asking for the moon and stars in spousal and child support. IMO, if there is no history of abuse or anything like that and the woman is seeking the dissolution of marriage, then she gets nothing in any form of monetary support. They can have equitable distribution of the marriage assets(house, car, stuff) but that's it.



That's pretty much how divorce goes, these days, unless one partner has a lot of money and the one without didn't sign a prenup, or unless children are involved.

My parents got divorced in 1986, at which point me and my sibs were all over 18 years old. My dad got his business, my mom got the house, as the court valued each at about the same amount. My dad had to pay my mom's medical insurance for 5 years and pay a small amount of alimony for the same period of time (less than $500 a month). The only reason my mom got the alimony was because they were married for 25 years, so it was considered a long-term marriage.

My mom thought she would get a lot more out of my dad. She watched a bunch of her friends do pretty well in divorces, but there were children under 18 involved, which meant child support. She didn't listen to my advice, and went for the no-fault divorce instead of filing on the grounds of (his) adultry. She also ignored my warning that my dad was liquidating the assets of his business prior to the court-appointed accountant's visit.

My dad didn't want the divorce at the time. He didn't fight her, but he certainly wasn't going to make it easy for her. The relationship worked for him-he paid her credit card bills, and she pretended he wasn't cheating on her. In retrospect, I'm glad they did get divorced because my dad would never have stopped drinking as long as he was married to my mom, who is a codependent borderline.

Wei Wu Wei
11-16-2010, 01:00 PM
No..no..no..

I've finally have seen the liberal light! Taxes are the answer! But we can't get enough from the rich, and the GOP won't let us, so we can tax the poor and blame the GOP for their hurt!

To quote our brilliant party member.

"paying your taxes is a patriotic duty" ~ Biden

So we get the 47% of those who don't pay taxes to now pay them, and vala, all the tax money we need to pay for all these wonderful Government programs and we can blame the GOP for the hurt they feel.

I have seen the light!

Yes we pay some of the lowest taxes in the industrialized world

NJCardFan
11-16-2010, 01:03 PM
But my point is if either party wants to end the marriage for anything other than abuse, adultery, etc, then they get nothing.

Bailey
11-16-2010, 01:22 PM
How can you be liberated if you are asking for handouts from the state?

Gingersnap
11-16-2010, 02:00 PM
I've always hated the term "liberation" when applied to social groups. Liberation is something that someone much more powerful than you does for you. It's not something you do for yourself.

I'm well aware of the many arguments in favor of state-child care for women. Rather than seeing this as a good way for women to reach economic parity, I see it as a good way to capture a larger segment of the low skill work force as well as a good way to inculcate dependence on the state and to create a fairly joyless childhood for children.

Those in favor of this situation see it as a way to address the problems of single women. In reality, the proliferation of single women with children is in itself a problem (and always has been).

Adults who have lived through childhoods mandated by the State in the former Soviet Union and its satellite states don't paint a happy picture. Their mothers were continuously in the workforce (married or not) and developed roughly the same attitude toward children and family life expressed by the men: low interest. The children themselves had little interest in someday having children; they focused much more on personal self-interest.

Even in the best of circumstances, it appears that there is something to a maternal time that emotionally secures a child in a way that random-stranger-time does not.

Molon Labe
11-16-2010, 02:11 PM
I hear a lot that true women's liberation that is possible in advanced societies is only possible through social services that cater to her biological and maternal needs.

The argument is usually that these are necessary in order for women to be able to fully participate in and run social and economic activity. There are millions and millions of intelligent, capable women. Many of them manage to miss common downfalls of men.

Would it be a huge boost for our society, productive and otherwise, to provide social services allowing all women a real equal opportunity at leadership positions in business, government, and social organization?

lol.

how do you define advanced society?

If you mean the one we currently inhabit, then I'll argue how "advanced" it is. We live in an overly "complicated" society. Make it less complicated (something progressives are against) and you might see some real women's liberation "liberty" sprout naturally.

megimoo
11-16-2010, 02:17 PM
You need an exorcism, I'll see if I can get a hold of Duzey.He actually needs an Major Enema to clear his little mind !

Molon Labe
11-16-2010, 02:29 PM
How can you be liberated if you are asking for handouts from the state?

Yep...see how backward "progressive" thinking is? That thinking pattern that believes by adding on to the beast this means more "liberation". So caught up in the mental masturbation of social engineering that you end up in Orwellian thinking patterns. Basically we need a Ministry of Women's Liberation to take care of those dirty child care duties.

noonwitch
11-16-2010, 02:34 PM
Yep...see how backward "progressive" thinking is? That thinking pattern that believes by adding on to the beast this means more "liberation". So caught up in the mental masturbation of social engineering that you end up in Orwellian thinking patterns. Basically we need a Ministry of Women's Liberation to take care of those dirty child care duties.


There's always CPS:D

Odysseus
11-16-2010, 03:10 PM
Right, the Republican approach.
No, the liberal/progressive/socialist approach

Yes we pay some of the lowest taxes in the industrialized world
And have the largest economy in the world to show for it, thank you very much. Guess you never ran across Arthur Laffer in your readings.

I hear a lot that true women's liberation that is possible in advanced societies is only possible through social services that cater to her biological and maternal needs.

That's not liberation. Slavery to the state is not freedom. Families cater to a woman's biological and maternal needs by providing a stable home, a partner who is invested in the security of that home and their children and a means of support when anything goes wrong. The state can't do that. It doesn't take a village to raise a child, it takes emotionally committed parents.


The argument is usually that these are necessary in order for women to be able to fully participate in and run social and economic activity. There are millions and millions of intelligent, capable women. Many of them manage to miss common downfalls of men.

Would it be a huge boost for our society, productive and otherwise, to provide social services allowing all women a real equal opportunity at leadership positions in business, government, and social organization?

Nope. It's been tried, and failed. AFDC, part of Johnson's Great Society, was meant to provide support to women with children so that they would be freed of the need to be part of a family. The results were catastrophic. Illegitimacy rates doubled in the black community, and the absence of fathers meant an absence of male role models, which perpetuated the worst traits of the absent men in their sons. The permanent underclass of welfare that resulted exacerbated every problem in poor communities, from violent crime to poverty. And throwing more money at the problem won't accomplish anything. Greater benefits just make single motherhood more attractive than marriage, which takes effort. The stated cannot be husband and father, it can just be nanny, and perpetual nannies infantilize people and render them incapable of making adult choices.

The women who rise to the top in business and politics tend not to be single careerists, but married women who have struck a balance between family and work, just as the men who rise to the top tend to be. How many single, childless women do you see in higher echelons of business or politics? How many single, childless men? Families aren't an impediment to success, they are a necessary component of it.

Spending more on failed social programs won't liberate anyone.

Apocalypse
11-16-2010, 05:43 PM
Yes we pay some of the lowest taxes in the industrialized world

YES! YES!!

We must immediately IMPOSE Europian Tax rates NOW!!!

Biden was right, paying taxes is patriotic, and with 47% of this nation unpatriotic, lets have them start paying their far share similar to the 44.2% middle class tax rate like the Dutch, or the 50.7% like the Germans! They have some of the best Social programs, and they actually have their middle class pay for it!!!

I understand the greatness of the liberal way!!

By the way, with the greatness that is the liberal way, where can I get a shirt like this one? You must know!

http://i913.photobucket.com/albums/ac337/Halftrack_mgc/080704-obama-che-t-shirt9.jpg

I must be like the Great One!!

Bailey
11-16-2010, 05:44 PM
No, the liberal/progressive/socialist approach

And have the largest economy in the world to show for it, thank you very much. Guess you never ran across Arthur Laffer in your readings.


That's not liberation. Slavery to the state is not freedom. Families cater to a woman's biological and maternal needs by providing a stable home, a partner who is invested in the security of that home and their children and a means of support when anything goes wrong. The state can't do that. It doesn't take a village to raise a child, it takes emotionally committed parents.



Nope. It's been tried, and failed. AFDC, part of Johnson's Great Society, was meant to provide support to women with children so that they would be freed of the need to be part of a family. The results were catastrophic. Illegitimacy rates doubled in the black community, and the absence of fathers meant an absence of male role models, which perpetuated the worst traits of the absent men in their sons. The permanent underclass of welfare that resulted exacerbated every problem in poor communities, from violent crime to poverty. And throwing more money at the problem won't accomplish anything. Greater benefits just make single motherhood more attractive than marriage, which takes effort. The stated cannot be husband and father, it can just be nanny, and perpetual nannies infantilize people and render them incapable of making adult choices.

The women who rise to the top in business and politics tend not to be single careerists, but married women who have struck a balance between family and work, just as the men who rise to the top tend to be. How many single, childless women do you see in higher echelons of business or politics? How many single, childless men? Families aren't an impediment to success, they are a necessary component of it.

Spending more on failed social programs won't liberate anyone.





Couldn't have said it better myself. A Man and Women in a commited relationship (marriage) will do more to liberate her then sucking up to the state will ever do.


Every Liberal wants us out of the wars in the ME but we have spent over a trillion dollars on the war on poverty cant we get out of that war as well?

Bailey
11-16-2010, 05:44 PM
YES! YES!!

We must immediately IMPOSE Europian Tax rates NOW!!!

Biden was right, paying taxes is patriotic, and with 47% of this nation unpatriotic, lets have them start paying their far share similar to the 44.2% middle class tax rate like the Dutch, or the 50.7% like the Germans! They have some of the best Social programs, and they actually have their middle class pay for it!!!

I understand the greatness of the liberal way!!

By the way, with the greatness that is the liberal way, where can I get a shirt like this one? You must know!

http://i913.photobucket.com/albums/ac337/Halftrack_mgc/080704-obama-che-t-shirt9.jpg

I must me like the Great One!!


COme on we we why dont the poor pay their fair share?

AmPat
11-16-2010, 05:56 PM
I say class warfare. Kill all the people that don't pay taxes and all our problems will solve themselves. Now go straight to the head of the line WEI WEI.

Hawkgirl
11-16-2010, 05:57 PM
If a single woman is going to raise kids alone, she has 3 choices:

1. work and make a lot of money, so she can pay for the day care
2. get enough child support from the dad in order to stay at home and raise the kid
3. find a way to get the government to pay for day care until the kids are in school all day.


If two parents are raising the children together, well, scheduling becomes the issue.

I am a single mother and I would never take a government handout. I work and make a decent living and support my child on my own. Well, not totally on my own, my parents are my "daycare" I am going to enroll my daughter in daycare next year 2 times a week so she can play with other children. That is MY choice. If my parents weren't able to provide childcare, then she would be in a private daycare, and I would probably not work as many hours. But I would NEVER, or have I ever, nor has my family ever taken government hand-outs.

As a catholic conservative, we are raised to be self-reliant. Self-reliance....something foreign to liberals.

Hawkgirl
11-16-2010, 06:00 PM
BTW WWW, The jobs in the managerial positions in my job are all women....and interesting, some are single women who raised children without a partner...yet we were able to get ahead...Women are not these fragile little creatures who can't excel without government intrusion.

Hawkgirl
11-16-2010, 06:36 PM
Would it be a huge boost for our society, productive and otherwise, to provide social services allowing all women a real equal opportunity at leadership positions in business, government, and social organization?


Yes it would, from the corporations or companies that hire them. My company has a reduced rate for employees. They cut a deal with a few local daycare centers as well as opening our own. Works great for those employed here. And no government money needed. It's about competition, families who need daycare may be more inclined to work for my company instead of the one down the block. It's another Perk. Like on site parking, medical and dental benefits, paid leave...etc. Let private sector companies compete. Leave the bloated government out of it. :D

Odysseus
11-16-2010, 06:45 PM
Couldn't have said it better myself. A Man and Women in a commited relationship (marriage) will do more to liberate her then sucking up to the state will ever do.


Every Liberal wants us out of the wars in the ME but we have spent over a trillion dollars on the war on poverty cant we get out of that war as well?

Even a country as affluent and filled with opportunity as the United States will have some poverty. It's unavoidable, simply because there will always be some people who cannot, or will not, do what it takes to thrive. Those who are physically or mentally incapable of working are a small percentage of the population, but those who choose to fail are a much larger group. The trick is to separate the former from the latter, take care of the former in a humane, compassionate manner, and let the latter group know that if they choose to fail, they will have to live with the consequences, but it's nobody's fault but their own.


I am a single mother and I would never take a government handout. I work and make a decent living and support my child on my own. Well, not totally on my own, my parents are my "daycare" I am going to enroll my daughter in daycare next year 2 times a week so she can play with other children. That is MY choice. If my parents weren't able to provide childcare, then she would be in a private daycare, and I would probably not work as many hours. But I would NEVER, or have I ever, nor has my family ever taken government hand-outs.

As a catholic conservative, we are raised to be self-reliant. Self-reliance....something foreign to liberals.

And, I will bet that having a child motivates you to excel, and to set an example by being self-reliant, so that she learns the same lessons. Am I right?

Phillygirl
11-16-2010, 07:19 PM
I'm not certain why anyone thinks it is the state's responsibility to raise someone's children. It is the parents' responsibility to do so. I have no objection to using the states' collective resources to "encourage" fathers to participate in the financial support of their children, but I see no responsibility on the state to step into that role by providing daycare for women that want to work.

Hawkgirl
11-16-2010, 07:33 PM
And, I will bet that having a child motivates you to excel, and to set an example by being self-reliant, so that she learns the same lessons. Am I right?

Absolutely, a parent is supposed to be a good role model. My brother, her uncle, is her father figure. She is being raised in a conservative catholic family,with the same values and work ethic.

Kay
11-16-2010, 07:50 PM
If a single woman is going to raise kids alone, she has 3 choices:

1. work and make a lot of money, so she can pay for the day care
2. get enough child support from the dad in order to stay at home and raise the kid
3. find a way to get the government to pay for day care until the kids are in school all day.


You left out own a business where you can work from home or take the child with you rather than sticking them in daycare.


Would it be a huge boost for our society, productive and otherwise, to provide social services allowing all women a real equal opportunity at leadership positions in business, government, and social organization?

NO.

Phillygirl
11-16-2010, 08:04 PM
You left out own a business where you can work from home or take the child with you rather than sticking them in daycare.



NO.

Another option is to make enough money, combined with support from the father, to enable her to work while raising the child jointly with the father. There is no reason why fathers have to be completely cut out of the financial and emotional lives of the children simply because the parents are no longer (or never were) married.

Hawkgirl
11-16-2010, 08:36 PM
There is no reason why fathers have to be completely cut out of the financial and emotional lives of the children simply because the parents are no longer (or never were) married.

There are plenty of reasons to keep some father's out of children's life. That blanket statement is not realistic. No father is better than an emotional and/or physical abusive father. Not everyone has the luxury of a "Leave it to Beaver" family.

Rockntractor
11-16-2010, 08:41 PM
There are plenty of reasons to keep some father's out of children's life. That blanket statement is not realistic. No father is better than an emotional and/or physical abusive father. Not everyone has the luxury of a "Leave it to Beaver" family.

I like Beaver!:confused:

Odysseus
11-16-2010, 08:41 PM
There are plenty of reasons to keep some father's out of children's life. That blanket statement is not realistic. No father is better than an emotional and/or physical abusive father. Not everyone has the luxury of a "Leave it to Beaver" family.

Yes, but is that the norm or the exception?

A mother's boyfriend or other adult acquaintance with no genetic connection to her children is far likelier to be a source of abuse.

Hawkgirl
11-16-2010, 08:51 PM
Yes, but is that the norm or the exception?

A mother's boyfriend or other adult acquaintance with no genetic connection to her children is far likelier to be a source of abuse.


I agree, that's why I don't date :) My point in my comment to phillygirl is that not ALL men are meant to be fathers. Some are just sperm donors who have no business parenting a child. Not all single mother's are welfare recipients.:D

Phillygirl
11-16-2010, 08:54 PM
There are plenty of reasons to keep some father's out of children's life. That blanket statement is not realistic. No father is better than an emotional and/or physical abusive father. Not everyone has the luxury of a "Leave it to Beaver" family.

While I agree with that, there appear to be some assumptions in this thread that a father's only role is either to pay the mother enough money to keep her home, or he is not there. There are all kinds of in betweens.

I also believe that marriage prior to having a child lessens the likelihood that the father is so utterly incapable of parenting that he should be cut out of the picture completely. It certainly doesn't eliminate it, but statistics being what they are, dating, engagement, and then marriage make it far more likely that a woman will see the shortcomings of a man prior to having his DNA a permanent reminder of same.

Phillygirl
11-16-2010, 09:00 PM
I agree, that's why I don't date :) My point in my comment to phillygirl is that not ALL men are meant to be fathers. Some are just sperm donors who have no business parenting a child. Not all single mother's are welfare recipients.:D

I agree with that as well. I know many single mothers and most of them have never been welfare recipients.

Odysseus
11-16-2010, 09:07 PM
While I agree with that, there appear to be some assumptions in this thread that a father's only role is either to pay the mother enough money to keep her home, or he is not there. There are all kinds of in betweens.

I also believe that marriage prior to having a child lessens the likelihood that the father is so utterly incapable of parenting that he should be cut out of the picture completely. It certainly doesn't eliminate it, but statistics being what they are, dating, engagement, and then marriage make it far more likely that a woman will see the shortcomings of a man prior to having his DNA a permanent reminder of same.
Agreed. And a father is far more than a financial means of support. My daughters see how I treat their mom, and they will base their assumptions of male/female interaction on what they see from me. That's a critical responsibility, and one that most men who have kids understand.

I agree, that's why I don't date :) My point in my comment to phillygirl is that not ALL men are meant to be fathers. Some are just sperm donors who have no business parenting a child. Not all single mother's are welfare recipients.:D
Not even most of them. But it does complicate life to try to raise a child without two parents.

Hawkgirl
11-16-2010, 09:08 PM
While I agree with that, there appear to be some assumptions in this thread that a father's only role is either to pay the mother enough money to keep her home, or he is not there. There are all kinds of in betweens.

I also believe that marriage prior to having a child lessens the likelihood that the father is so utterly incapable of parenting that he should be cut out of the picture completely. It certainly doesn't eliminate it, but statistics being what they are, dating, engagement, and then marriage make it far more likely that a woman will see the shortcomings of a man prior to having his DNA a permanent reminder of same.

Well, being the divorce rate is 50% in climbing....I'd say lots of women fail to see the shortcomings in the men they marry. Some divorced dads make great parents...but some don't.

Disclaimer: I am fully aware that women can be the cause of failed marriage as well...just speaking in generalities.

Phillygirl
11-16-2010, 09:12 PM
Well, being the divorce rate is 50% in climbing....I'd say lots of women fail to see the shortcomings in the men they marry. Some divorced dads make great parents...but some don't.

Disclaimer: I am fully aware that women can be the cause of failed marriage as well...just speaking in generalities.

No doubt. But the chance of a man remaining in a child's life, both emotionally and financially, are increased dramatically if there was a marriage involved than if the parties were never married.

Hawkgirl
11-16-2010, 09:24 PM
No doubt. But the chance of a man remaining in a child's life, both emotionally and financially, are increased dramatically if there was a marriage involved than if the parties were never married.


Statistically maybe...but I know a few real stories where that wasn't the case.

Hawkgirl
11-16-2010, 09:35 PM
Agreed. And a father is far more than a financial means of support. My daughters see how I treat their mom, and they will base their assumptions of male/female interaction on what they see from me. .


Apparantly, they have a healthy view of the male/female relationship...some of us aren't so lucky. I suppose that is part of the reason I am CHOOSING to raise my daugther on my own...which goes back to my earlier assertion...sometimes 1 mother and lots of love is better than 2 parents who are at eachother's throats all the time, or a father who is absent.

Anyway, I understand the prejudices, I had them myself....but now that I find myself in this situation, I try not to judge.


Back on topic, I say no public assistance for day care. ;)

PoliCon
11-16-2010, 09:40 PM
I hear a lot that true women's liberation that is possible in advanced societies is only possible through social services that cater to her biological and maternal needs.

The argument is usually that these are necessary in order for women to be able to fully participate in and run social and economic activity. There are millions and millions of intelligent, capable women. Many of them manage to miss common downfalls of men.

Would it be a huge boost for our society, productive and otherwise, to provide social services allowing all women a real equal opportunity at leadership positions in business, government, and social organization?

http://ihasahotdog.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/funny-dog-pictures-stupid-magnitude.jpg

Odysseus
11-16-2010, 11:00 PM
Apparantly, they have a healthy view of the male/female relationship...some of us aren't so lucky. I suppose that is part of the reason I am CHOOSING to raise my daugther on my own...which goes back to my earlier assertion...sometimes 1 mother and lots of love is better than 2 parents who are at eachother's throats all the time, or a father who is absent.

Anyway, I understand the prejudices, I had them myself....but now that I find myself in this situation, I try not to judge.

I would hope that my daughters have a healthy view of it, since my wife and I are the role models. :D

But, I do understand that things aren't always that way, and I'm not judging you for making your choices. If anything, I'd like to have a chat with the guy who put you in the position of having to make them. Preferably with a baseball bat. :D


Back on topic, I say no public assistance for day care. ;)
Agreed.

Hawkgirl
11-17-2010, 12:01 AM
I would hope that my daughters have a healthy view of it, since my wife and I are the role models. :D

But, I do understand that things aren't always that way, and I'm not judging you for making your choices. If anything, I'd like to have a chat with the guy who put you in the position of having to make them. Preferably with a baseball bat. :D


Agreed.


LOL....thanks...we'll be fine..:D

Apocalypse
11-17-2010, 12:35 AM
We all need to do as Wei has taught us so we can be like every other Industrialized nation out there and tax our middle class near 50% so we can provide social programs that are failing. That way we can be more progressive!