And I really feel THIS ((((waves hands around))))) is why we see this disparity in the young females who support Bernie vs the older ones who support HRC. I bet many of the young female Bernie fans are not trying to both have kids and have a career right now. They haven't yet faced the harsh reality that "having it all" is virtually impossible for women but pretty much standard for men. Once you see the disparity in the work force it's hard to ignore the pervasive reality of sexism in modern America. I mean. Did I really understand this as a 20 year old? No way. But when you get older and start taking on very real adult world things like parenting and professions you realize how the cards are so stacked against working moms and two parent working families in general. We are a world that requires women to work but we still operate under the mindset that we are world where women should stay home and take care of the kids first and foremost. What does Bernie have to say about this?
Nailed it. The media is acting like HRC is old and out of touch. And a harpy shrew. When really, it's because older women (I say that meaning anyone over 30, not really old) know better than to latch onto Bernie's privileged pipe dreams.
Reading that article and how little BS has disclosed about his background....man, the GOP is going to have a field day with him if he gets the nomination. His background is not impressive and he has been far from forthcoming with any details.
I think people are surprisingly uneducated on this topic. I had a female coworker who did not realize there was zero paid maternity leave at our office.
It was legitimately shocking to me the number of people who made comments about me earning a pay check while I was on leave or asking why I was unhappy about being back so early. The assumption was that I was a) being paid and b) that I could take off all the time I wanted. Every single time I explained how FMLA works and that there is no guarantee of paid leave for the majority of employers (mine included) people were shocked. Like, jaw drop, how the hell did you afford taking time off, I'm so sorry, kind of shocked.
It's absurd. The whole fucking thing is so absurd.
Also I think that if somebody had told me in so many words before I had kids that daycare would cost as much as my mortgage, I might not have had them.
At all.
It sounded much less terrifying when we were talking costs per week for one kid. But having #2 and realizing that daycare is our #1 expense is just...sobering. Like that mortgage was vomit inducing when we first signed the papers. And now we pay it twice. At least the payoff period is shorter.
So much this. It's also "easier" to deal with the costs for a little bit, but it just drags on year after year with no break. We were okay for the first couple years when it was just DS1. But then we had DS2, cars needed replacing, other costs go up, the kids need to take swimming lessons, etc. it just piles up. On top of paying $20k a year in childcare.
Now we feel like we're in a never-ending rut of paying childcare, especially when you think about summer camps and after-school care for school-aged kids. Like, this shit is never going to stop. Until they're 15 and 12 and then it's 2 years until DS1 goes to college.
Summer camps are crazy expensive. I just signed my 2 sons up for a camp that costs ~250 a week per kid for 6 weeks. And that is without before or after care! 9-4. I doubt many offices fit their hours within those windows.
I know I'll probably be flamed by this, but we did actually weigh out working vs SAHM daycare costs, college costs etc when we were thinking about having kids. Ultimately we decided not to. All of this (among other things) were part of the reasons why.
I find this really sad. The wealthiest nation in the world, and people with decent jobs feel they can't afford something as fundamental as having children.
"Not gonna lie; I kind of keep expecting you to post one day that you threw down on someone who clearly had no idea that today was NOT THEIR DAY." ~dontcallmeshirley
I find this really sad. The wealthiest nation in the world, and people with decent jobs feel they can't afford something as fundamental as having children.
It wasn't so much as we couldn't afford it, but we just weighed everything out before deciding.
I know "whoopsies" happen but I also think more people should/could weigh this stuff out before deciding to start a family.
So you think the 10% should have kids? Because the reality is MANY families would not be able to have kids if they didn't accept this reality and I say that as someone who was fortunate to be able to make the choice of working or not based on my preference not necessity. It's BS that childcare is such a hardship for couples where both parents need or want to work.
I find this really sad. The wealthiest nation in the world, and people with decent jobs feel they can't afford something as fundamental as having children.
It wasn't so much as we couldn't afford it, but we just weighed everything out before deciding.
I know "whoopsies" happen but I also think more people should/could weigh this stuff out before deciding to start a family.
I did. Then I went to the doctor and they said "twins."
You can't plan ahead for everything. You just can't. Sometimes you have to wing it.
"Not gonna lie; I kind of keep expecting you to post one day that you threw down on someone who clearly had no idea that today was NOT THEIR DAY." ~dontcallmeshirley
Post by LoveTrains on Feb 11, 2016 19:43:37 GMT -5
There are a bunch of reasons that my H and I have considered in regards to staying child-free. Money is one of them - and our income puts is in the top 5% in this country. I think we absolutely need paid family leave and better daycare options.
There are many reasons that one might use to stay child free by choice - but what a sad commentary that wealthy people in the wealthiest country in the world think they might not be able to afford it. It's because we, as a society, do not really have "family values".
It's not. Because he is a man. And while he pays lip service to "lower Ed" issues it's not on his list of priorities. Nor is it on most men's lists who are in positions of power (though certainly not all! Obama has done a good job highlighting this issue.) But this is why we need more women in elected office....yes. More women at the table. The establishment, if you will.
Back to reading the thread....
I haven't seen Hillary's plan on low cost childcare/preschool, but I"m really glad to hear there is a concrete plan/promise!
I have more faith that she would make child care a priority than a man would.
And that's what this is about. Maybe they both pay lip service to child care. But where does it fall in the hierarchy of priorities? HRC brought up child care in her NH consession speech the other night. Bernie Sanders mentions very little beyond Wall Street, money in politics, and revolutions.
So I just went to Bernie's official page and this is what he says about child care :
MAKE QUALITY CHILDCARE AND PRE-K AVAILABLE TO ALL AMERICANS. Sen. Sanders is working on a plan to make high-quality childcare and Pre-K available to every American, regardless of income. It is unacceptable that the cost of a quality childcare program is out of reach for millions of Americans.
So I just went to Bernie's official page and this is what he says about child care :
MAKE QUALITY CHILDCARE AND PRE-K AVAILABLE TO ALL AMERICANS. Sen. Sanders is working on a plan to make high-quality childcare and Pre-K available to every American, regardless of income. It is unacceptable that the cost of a quality childcare program is out of reach for millions of Americans.
That's it.
And it's buried under "women's issues."
:/
Glad he's working on it. And once he's president he'll have oodles of time to hammer out the details, while sipping lattes and gazing pensively into the distance.
This is what I'm talking about. Child care is a "woman's issue." It gets back burnered (lololololololol). "Working on a plan" pfffft. We all know what this means. It means he doesn't give a shit.
This is what I'm talking about. Child care is a "woman's issue." It gets back burnered (lololololololol). "Working on a plan" pfffft. We all know what this means. It means he doesn't give a shit.
That really pisses me off. Child care is an issue for EVERYONE. And as a child-free person, I care about it because it makes society better!
This is what I'm talking about. Child care is a "woman's issue." It gets back burnered (lololololololol). "Working on a plan" pfffft. We all know what this means. It means he doesn't give a shit.
Fixing the economy will result in all these awesome things happen automatically. No need to worry your lady brain on it. It's Sanders' version of "trickle down."
"Not gonna lie; I kind of keep expecting you to post one day that you threw down on someone who clearly had no idea that today was NOT THEIR DAY." ~dontcallmeshirley
I agree, this article makes many valid points. At the very least, the federal government should raise the amount that is tax deductible for childcare. I think it is only $5k or so right now? I feel like that could be doubled without too big of a big push back from Republicans (I have a feeling that creating a chain of national, subsidized daycare centers would get a negative reaction from them, to say the least).
This is a start, but I am SO SICK of everything being a start. Why can't we ever seem to have something that's a good CONTINUANCE. I feel like, as a country, we're stuck in place permanently on these sorts of issues. Too many people think that women need to stay home with their kids, and how terrible of a mother ARE YOU if you choose to work instead of being a SAHM. If you WANT to be a SAHM, the fine, that's awesome. If you do it because you have no other choice, because you can't afford daycare and our parental leave policy sucks, that's horrible.
And I make twice what Mr. Emisi makes and people still asked if I'd come back to work. What, you mean still be able to afford our mortgage AND still have health care, since it all comes out of my paycheck because his benefits suck? Yes.
I agree, this article makes many valid points. At the very least, the federal government should raise the amount that is tax deductible for childcare. I think it is only $5k or so right now? I feel like that could be doubled without too big of a big push back from Republicans (I have a feeling that creating a chain of national, subsidized daycare centers would get a negative reaction from them, to say the least).
This is a start, but I am SO SICK of everything being a start. Why can't we ever seem to have something that's a good CONTINUANCE. I feel like, as a country, we're stuck in place permanently on these sorts of issues. Too many people think that women need to stay home with their kids, and how terrible of a mother ARE YOU if you choose to work instead of being a SAHM. If you WANT to be a SAHM, the fine, that's awesome. If you do it because you have no other choice, because you can't afford daycare and our parental leave policy sucks, that's horrible.
And I make twice what Mr. Emisi makes and people still asked if I'd come back to work. What, you mean still be able to afford our mortgage AND still have health care, since it all comes out of my paycheck because his benefits suck? Yes.
I know what you mean but while this would be a small incremental step, it's realistic and at least it's a step in the right direction and something that would help people. It's something that can really happen in the near future. The idea of the government subsidizing daycare is at least ten years out imo if not a generation into the future. Sanders is the one proposing radical, far reaching changes in this election and this doesn't seem to be on his agenda at all.
It wasn't so much as we couldn't afford it, but we just weighed everything out before deciding.
I know "whoopsies" happen but I also think more people should/could weigh this stuff out before deciding to start a family.
I did. Then I went to the doctor and they said "twins."
You can't plan ahead for everything. You just can't. Sometimes you have to wing it.
yes! I had it planned to. the. month. so we'd only be paying for 1 in daycare. G was going into K in September and I was due in mid-November (I was avoiding G and baby 2 having the same b-day.) then, SUR-MOTHERFUCKING-PRISE!
I mentioned something about daycare payments to my father (whom you may recall, I worked for until his retirement) and he said to me; "well, you chose to have them." seriously. I said, "I chose to have ONE."
I hate that this discussion invariably becomes a fiscal discussion rather than one that is multifaceted. yes, I work to help pay the mortgage, pay the bills and feed my family. but so does H. we also both work because we WANT to work. I don't think of my working as a luxury as paying for daycare pulled a majority of my paycheck but staying at home has always been a non-starter. I get shunned because I'm being selfish by making myself happy by working.
I cannot imagine anyone telling H he's being selfish by being happy working.
I actually take issue with your referring to 4-6 weeks of leave as "the standard." There is no standard in this country for paid leave.
Precisely. Instarted a new job in October and had to negotiate a maternity leave. I'm taking 4 weeks, unpaid. FOUR WEEKS. I will still likely be bleeding when I return to work. I'm the executive director of a non profit. I'm the only employee. My Board d was stuck between a rock and a hard place. So when I go back at 4 weeks "at least" I get to bring the baby with me. Huh?
FMLA online applies IF an employee has been with a company for a year and IF that company has more than 50 employees. In that regard, small businesses are bad for women employees.
And IF those 50 employees are within a certain geographic distance and IF you worked a certain number of hours during that year of employment.
Thank god for FMLA. I'm counting down until I'm eligible. I'm going AMA to postpone a medical procedure because I need a job, and FMLA will preserve that. Unpaid, which will be a financial disaster, but I'll have a job.
So thank god for a policy that is incredibly limited, and may be financially disastrous if you're one of the lucky people that qualifies for it
I have more faith that she would make child care a priority than a man would.
And that's what this is about. Maybe they both pay lip service to child care. But where does it fall in the hierarchy of priorities? HRC brought up child care in her NH consession speech the other night. Bernie Sanders mentions very little beyond Wall Street, money in politics, and revolutions.
I've been wanting to do this since yesterday. I have no idea why I waited.
"Not gonna lie; I kind of keep expecting you to post one day that you threw down on someone who clearly had no idea that today was NOT THEIR DAY." ~dontcallmeshirley
I was that early 20 something who didn't support accommodations for parents (well, really, moms of course) because they had a choice in parenthood.
I think it was 50/50 naivete and poor management.
The naivete part is more suited to why I could have been a Berner, and I think we've covered many of the reasons why fresh out of college women may be more idealistic.
Company policy was that if a drive was under 2.5 hours one way according to mapquest (another lol), it was not paid travel time. And we were at different locations all the time. Moms generally got to stay much closer to home b/c daycare pickup was 5:30 with apparently incapable dads.
Well, those of us who weren't moms, both male and female, carried the brunt of that unpaid lengthy traveling. It created a lot of resentment. There were weeks I had 4-5 hour daily commutes every direction within that radius. That affected my thinking for quite awhile.
But this is also why I came around to thinking government intervention/subsidy was necessary. Not just for working moms but for everyone. Maternity leave (paid) helps women stay in the workforce. Parental leave helps with the expectation moms are the only caregivers. That all benefits me as a female employee regardless if I have children or not. It helps me if I'm not shouldering extra b/c daycare has a strict cutoff. Paid sick leave is good for everyone. Plus, it's just the right thing to do.
It took me awhile to shift from it not being "fair" that maternity leave might be paid and recovery from a surgery, for instance, wouldn't be. I think I'd even be ok with more paid sick time for parents b/c they're affected by more than just their own bodies. Plus, keep the germs at home, please.
Yeah, I'm rambling. Sorry!
tl;dr I'd move to Denmark if there were more light
This is what I'm talking about. Child care is a "woman's issue." It gets back burnered (lololololololol). "Working on a plan" pfffft. We all know what this means. It means he doesn't give a shit.
Or it could mean he gives lots of shits but isn't actively involved in the writing and design of his website.
By the way, guess where paid family leave and childcare issue is slotted on Hillary's site? You guessed it - under Women's Rights and Opportunity.
Does that mean she doesn't give a shit or does she get more benefit of the doubt?
Actually you are incorrect if you looked at the other two links I posted.
I did. The first two are about early childhood education and universal pre-school. The third is the same one I posted - family leave and affordable child care are listed under women's opportunities.
“Too often, these are called women’s issues. Well, I am a proud lifelong fighter for women’s issues, because I firmly believe what’s good for women is good for America. … As far as I’m concerned, any issue that affects women’s lives and futures is a women’s issue.” Hillary, SEPTEMBER 5, 2015
For what it's worth, I don't think Hillary cares less about the issue because it's a "women's issue" on her website, just like I don't think Bernie doesn't care. And I think both know something about how hard it is to have a family and a job, though obviously, Bernie never enjoyed the income that Hilary did.
It's not even comparable. On Bernie's page "child care" is a subset of "women's issues." On Hillary's page it is its own category. And under "women's economic issues" she talks about child care IN ADDITION to giving it an entire prominent platform. Bernie doesn't give a shit not because of where he categorizes it though. He doesn't give a shit because he's been running for how long now and doesn't have more than an "under construction" notice. It's not on his hierarchy priorities. It's just not. And it doesn't have to be. But let's not gild the Lilly here and make his commitment bigger than it is.
Reproductive rights and maternity leave, equal pay... those are women's issues.
Childcare, healthcare, parental leave are family issues.
I'd just love for a candidate to put all that under the headline of family values.
And I'm not going to give bernie a pass that he may not look at his webpage. If he had a platform, any intern could post it. He simply doesn't have one.
I hate that this discussion invariably becomes a fiscal discussion rather than one that is multifaceted. yes, I work to help pay the mortgage, pay the bills and feed my family. but so does H. we also both work because we WANT to work. I don't think of my working as a luxury as paying for daycare pulled a majority of my paycheck but staying at home has always been a non-starter. I get shunned because I'm being selfish by making myself happy by working.
I cannot imagine anyone telling H he's being selfish by being happy working.
[/quote] Yes! My year's mat leave was miserable. I didn't realize how much I hated staying home until I went back to work after ds1 was born. Then I spent much of my mat leave with ds2 waiting for the year to end. I would be so depressed stuck as a sahm. I'm so glad we were able to afford daycare for ds1 while I was building my business and not making much money. I'm thankful dh was supportive of that plan too.
I'm a much better mother when I get a break from my kids.