TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

The secret to getting more women to the top could be giving fathers more time off

stormforce7916

February 15, 2016
131 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/wp/2016/02/09/the-secret-to-getting-more-women-to-the-top-could-be-giving-fathers-more-time-off/
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title The secret to getting more women to the top could be giving fathers more time off
Author

stormforce7916

Upvotes 131
Comments 85
Date February 15, 2016 2:12 PM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/45wmir/the_secret_to_getting_more_women_to_the_top_could/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/the-secret-to-getting-more-women-to-the-top-could.956106
https://theredarchive.com/post/956106
Red Pill terms in post
leadership
Top posts by stormforce7916

Men who stick up for women's rights are subjected to more sexual harassment at work

152 upvotes
January 28, 2016
/r/MensRights

Why is there a lesbian wage premium?

63 upvotes
February 22, 2016
/r/MensRights

Egg freezing has little to do with inflexible workplaces

17 upvotes
February 23, 2016
/r/MensRights

New research shows it is easier for females to gain

0 upvotes
February 29, 2016
/r/MensRights

To fight the slow pace of gender equality in the workplace, attack the root cause

0 upvotes
January 20, 2016
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]tonyfaulkner 44 points45 points46 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

To give men rights we must look at how the lack of that right affects women badly. It is quite the irony, is it not?

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Maybe, but try this spin: If we improve the lives of men, we improve the lives of everyone else.

[–]TheDemeisen 29 points30 points31 points 10 years ago (41 children) | Copy Link

It's a no brainer really, give men equal paternity leave instead of the shitty crap they get now. Equality is a two way street.

[–]SchalaZeal01 14 points15 points16 points 10 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

For men to actually take it without their employer giving them the stink eye, it has to be mandated as his leave being 40-50% of total parental leave, and a 'take it or lose it' deal.

If it's a "one parent takes the leave", mothers take the most, even in Canada or Japan who are generous on paid leave. Japan is actually more generous, offering something like an entire year for fathers. But 2% take it.

[–]dominotw 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

what if you don't report to your employer that you are having a baby?

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Then that is your loss.

[–]dominotw -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No. Its back to the original problem of men not taking enough leave even if employers allow it.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A lot of men in the military actually use parental leave. The wife either is a stay at home mom, takes an unpaid leave of absence or leaves her job on having the baby.

[–]elebrin 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, if I were in that situation, I'd take the paid leave and take a second job during that time to make extra money. I generally do that anyways - when I take vacation time, I go work in a friend's shop in my hometown for a week or so. I get to see my family and see some old friends.

[–]Mortis909 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Might have something to do with the need to breast feed perhaps?

[–]SchalaZeal01 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Nurse maids, pumps, and baby formula. There is no 'need' to breast feed.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Not good enough.

[–]SchalaZeal01 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Pumps are good enough. It's the same milk. If you're that anal, about them having THAT milk. But nursing maids have existed for hundreds of years, without killing people.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Pumping is, simply put, not always a viable option.

Nurse maids are expensive.

Formula is shit.

[–]SchalaZeal01 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Me and my 3 brothers got formula exclusively, no problem either.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

How would you even know?

Anyway, every study ever has shown that bottlefeeding is inferior to breastfeeding, significantly.

Also, formula is excessively expensive.

[–]not_AtWorkRightNow 19 points20 points21 points 10 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

It's never ceases to amaze me how feminists never seem to consider making things equal as the solution to achieving equality.

[–]Nissa-Nissa 17 points18 points19 points 10 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

I was suggesting this very thing to my boyfriend last night when we were discussing the wage gap as being down to societal factors rather than discriminatory bosses. This is the kind of equality that will help organically reduce sexist situations for both genders. The good thing about parental leave is that it can't be levelled down, due to biology, so we have to level up. A lot of equality sees the opposite- eg in the UK, the inequality in car insurance premiums was dealt with by making females may more, not males pay less. I consider myself a feminist (though the feminist subreddits make me angry), and I only advocate making things actually equal. Quotas, safe spaces etc are ridiculous, and sexist, and banging on about discrimination against women now only serves to make things worse for both genders. Better work/life balance for all!

[–]justcantwin1111 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

why should any employer pay a woman or man for having a baby? i can see a sabbatical but i don't see how it is the employers responsibility to pay child support. this is all getting ridiculous with now having to pay women for their body their choice bull. this is more like extortion and entitlement than what is needed. if you saved up time off than you earned it and are entitled to it.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

why should any employer pay a woman or man for having a baby?

Indeed why should they. This is why in Canada the pay that employees receive while on parental/maternity leave comes from the Employment Insurance premiums they pay. They're essentially using their own money that they in into the program in premiums. So why shouldn't they be able to use it?

Many employers choose to supplement these benefits as a way of retaining skilled employees though.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Could I get that money back otherwise? or is it just plain and simply wealth redistribution?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

The money can be used to replace income in case of job loss, for parental leave and for some job retraining and apprenticeship programs.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

Right...but how much of that can I expect to see?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Depends what industry you work in and where you live really.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

So it is just wealth distribution...

[–]iainmf 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

On the flip side, why can't non-parents have similar arrangements for time off. I mean we are told it is a human rights violation to discriminate against someone based on pregnancy, why should non-pregnant people be excluded?

[–]Nissa-Nissa -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Because reproduction is an essential part of life, that should be supported and not made more difficult because it interferes with profits.

The majority of people work the entirety of their adult lives, until their productivity falls enough. A system that allows for a relativity small amount of time to have children is realistic and fair. Making people save that amount is unrealistic in a lot of economies at the moment, and encouraging a lot of people to hand over care of their children almost immediately so they can work is tenuous in terms of fairness and probably unwise in the long term.

Why shouldn't society be moving in that direction?

[–]justcantwin1111 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Because reproduction is an essential part of life, that should be supported and not made more difficult because it interferes with profits.

no it is not essential. it is a choice as i have been told by women. it is her body and her child, as an employer myself i hold no responsibility to her family. i pay for work done not for choices made on off work hours. should i also pay her bills and collage for her choices. how much of her life is my responsibility and where is the line drawn?

my choice was to be an employer and business owner should i pay for the unemployed ? this is not about profit it is about being responsible for your own choices.

Making people save that amount is unrealistic in a lot of economies at the moment

so do we need to coddle people that make poor decisions now? or do those that make proper choices need suffer?

[–]RatsSewer 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

no it is not essential. it is a choice as i have been told by women. it is her body and her child, as an employer myself i hold no responsibility to her family. i pay for work done not for choices made on off work hours. should i also pay her bills and collage for her choices. how much of her life is my responsibility and where is the line drawn?

What job will you give when everyone is dead? It is essential, and although I agree with you, you're wrong about it being non essential.

[–]justcantwin1111 -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

your assumption is that human life matters at all. life is nothing but chance and if an asteroid or virus wiped life out was it essential. the value we place on "things" or "women" is over rated. are women move valuable than men? if no women have children ever again would life just stop? would we all just vanish? life will continue and when the last human took their last breath life would still move forward. the artificial womb will remove the "essential" part of special treatment of women.

[–]RatsSewer 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm assuming you won't have a business if you have no workers/customers.

[–]Mortis909 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

It's not essential to eat either, you have a choice. If you didn't you would die, if people didn't reproduce, we would all die. That would mean less customers for your business.

[–]justcantwin1111 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

we all die, it's a part of life. if i owned the funeral home i would be doing great.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Not long term, you would be out of business.

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

He'd be doing business as long as it was necessary. As he lost business, so would his ability to gather goods and other things he desires increase, as no people = pick up the loot.

[–]Nissa-Nissa -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

You hold some legal responsibility to her family. For example, if your employee died as a result of your negligence, you would be liable for a lot of financial responsibility.

But that's off point. I'm not going to get into this.

Obviously only people that have had all the right opportunities to be in the minority of people that can sustain a family comfortably on one income have the privilege of child-bearing.

Let's not coddle, let's make the basics life harder for the average person so that employers don't feel ripped off. Let's make one of the few natural joys of the human experience available to those in the right positions, because of 'fairness'. Employers have no responsibilities to their employees at all. Work for someone for years who can treat you like shit for wanting to do experience the basics of all existence.
At least it will create more jobs in abortion clinics.

[–]wzil 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Someone dying because of one's negligence is now comparable to someone choosing to get pregnant? The reason you are responsible is found in the 'YOUR negligence' part. And if you forced her to get pregnant, you would also be responsible. But if she fully and freely choose it herself, then it is in no way the employers fault.

Now, if the employer makes a promise as part of the compensation package, then they should be legally bound to it because they agreed to a contract. But that should be up to the employer to choose the package they want to offer.

[–]justcantwin1111 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You hold some legal responsibility to her family. For example, if your employee died as a result of your negligence, you would be liable for a lot of financial responsibility.

key word being "negligence". no under law i am not "negligence" toward a pregnant woman for not paying her to have children.

Obviously only people that have had all the right opportunities to be in the minority of people that can sustain a family comfortably on one income have the privilege of child-bearing.

no it is a choice that you as the parent need be responsible for. YES ADULTS NEED TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS!!!!!

Let's not coddle, let's make the basics life harder for the average person so that employers don't feel ripped off.

this line is an attempt at a joke right. again it is not the employers responsibility to ensure your lifestyle! employers also have legal protections and rights.

Let's make one of the few natural joys of the human experience available to those in the right positions, because of 'fairness'.

this has nothing to do with fairness.

Employers have no responsibilities to their employees at all.

we are responsible for work related issues not private choices.

Work for someone for years who can treat you like shit for wanting to do experience the basics of all existence.

this is not the basics in any way. in no way am i as an employer shitting on my employees for not paying their child support or their life choices.

At least it will create more jobs in abortion clinics.

Lmmfao

[–]deadalnix 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Taking theeleave makes the men less competitive. That is why there is a pay gap to boot. I suspect many will just not take it and not much will change (this is more or less what is hapening in countries where it is the case).

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It has to be mandated.

Canada has parental leave, but they don't go to the lengths of mandating that men take half. They leave it up to the parents to decide how to allocate it, and, sure as shit, most families have the mother using all or most of it.

The only real solution is 50/50. Six months each, 9 months each, 12 months each ... the exact length can be debated over, but the fact both parents have to take it, and it's the same length for both are features that should be set in stone.

[–]dominotw 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

wouldn't men have to inform their employers that they are having a baby for this to be enforced ? seems pretty intrusive if govt mandated that.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It is definitely intrusive, which is why very few nations have opted to go that route (Sweden just did so, but it's the only nation, to my knowledge).

In the end, it's the same problem you have with any system that uses equal opportunity rather than equal outcome - you can open the door, but you can't make people walk through. How, for example, do you make more men sign up for nursing or midwifery? They CAN, any time they want. They just don't.

So ... we do the long, hard work as a society to change attitudes and perceptions, or we mandate. I really don't see any other options.

[–]MalibuStayZ 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Definitely something which could help improve the two main issues men and women are facing IMHO:

  • More representation and wage for women

  • More humane society for men, in which they are not considered as disposable and their value and dignity is not defined by success in their job

[–]coke501 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

And, in an ideal world, more fathers that spent time with their children and therefore are seen, will reduce the number of lunatics that casually accuse men out with their children of pedofilia.

[–]intensely_human[🍰] 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Also it'll increase the amount of father-child contact that children have overall, which is good for their development.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And even 4-6 weeks of parental leave until the new baby is settled and sleeping through the night makes life less of a living nightmare for all involved.

[–]roharareddit 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's right, let women go to work and earn the bread.

Child support and alimony for men!

[–]Aaod 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Those with higher relative scores for women versus men on math tests, for instance, were correlated with more women in powerful roles.

This one I can agree on American women are disgusted by math, but women from other countries such as Russia do not seem to mind it.

[–]mikesteane 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I have yet to see any convincing argument for why we need more women at the top.

[–]Nissa-Nissa 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Because the current situation suggests we don't have the best people for the best jobs. But I have yet to see a convincing argument we need to put more women at the top for the sake of it.

[+]Lowkeypeepee -6 points-5 points-4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

To temporarily fix our current situation putting women at the top would probably work. They spend like crazy, so the economy would really be moving there for a little bit. Then all the corps would go bankrupt and divorce us, i.e. Leave the country and do it again.

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well not just that but also change the culture where fathers and mothers are neither celebrated nor denigrated for doing so.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

One closer step to the matriarchy of feminist dreams. Help men only if it will help women; otherwise who cares.

[–]microwave2000 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't understand why this makes you angry. Paternity leave would be great for mom, dad, and baby. New moms would be thrilled to have the dad be able to take time off work to spend with the newborn.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The article frames it in a gynocentric way, that is we should help men because it benefits women. Reminds me of Emma Watson's speech at the UN.

[–]baskandpurr 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Women will never settle for this idea. Men are supposed to work to pay for the woman to have children, that's the deal as far as they are concerned. Women don't really want men having more time off because children would have the same effect on men's pay as they do on women's. If there is any potential for extra time off it would be used by women.

[–]AloysiusC 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The secret to getting more women to the top: take pressure off all men and apply it to women. Problem is more women will also wind up at the bottom - as men are now.

[–]RubixCubeDonut 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I doubt it'll really help. The underlying issue is that women are specifically looking for men with higher earning potential. So, is it any surprise that you find more men in a place where women want them?

Giving fathers as much time off as women will probably just cause men to either start making up for it in other ways or giving up and becoming MGTOW.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Giving fathers as much time off as women will probably just cause men to either start making up for it in other ways or giving up and becoming MGTOW.

I took time off when my kids were born. My wife was breastfeeding and pumping milk. She couldn't make milk if she was woken up at night. So I stayed up nights with the babies for a few weeks until they get settled and fed them expressed milk. It was great.

[–]RubixCubeDonut 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is "men in general" not "every single man ever". It's a description of trends that will take more than a couple years after massive application before you'd start seeing the effects.

After all, it's not like the Japanese salaryman literally appeared overnight.

So, while I'd like for your situation to be the norm, I'm not really sure how it's relevant to what I was saying. (Especially since I have my doubts that it's an indication of the effects of such policies and more of an indication of the cushiness of your job. Sort of like how if I owned the company I worked for I could come in later, leave earlier, and take more vacation...)

[–]icefire54[🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

These studies that find corporate gains from female leaders are bullshit. This study even admits at the end that the data isn't very reliable. Meanwhile, legit studies on this topic show that female leaders have a negative effect on corporate profits.

https://c4mb.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/121113-v4-the-five-studies-showing-that-increasing-female-representation-on-boards-leads-to-a-decline-in-corporate-performance.pdf

[–]Lrellok 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I drive truck. The industry standard is 2 weeks on, 2 days off. When you feel like getting me a normal 5 day work week, please, lemme know.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Anyone who wants to is more than free to offer it to their employees.

[–]SchalaZeal01 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

It should be from the state so small companies are not disadvantaged. Big companies like Apple and Wal-Mart don't care much and they like the PR, your small startup just can't even afford it.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

When you say it is from "the State", you really mean you want people like me who don't have anything to do with you to pay you a salary to stay home because you decided to have a baby.

Nothing is preventing you to save up and take the time off under FMLA. If you cannot afford a baby, try not having one until you can pay your own way.

[–]SchalaZeal01 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If you cannot afford a baby, try not having one until you can pay your own way.

Until you forcefully sterilize people, people won't listen to reason.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That is fine. We are talking about paid vacations for working professionals not baby formula. If they do not adequately prepare, they will simply have to do without taking months off.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

When you say it is from "the State", you really mean you want people like me who don't have anything to do with you to pay you a salary to stay home because you decided to have a baby.

No. You have workers pay Employment Insuarance premiums. Then after a certain amount of time doing so they are entitled to draw benefits if they lose their job, or if they have a child. The "state" doesn't pay it as such, it comes from a pool of money generated through premiums paid by people earning wages from a job. In an indirect way they are funding it themselves.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

You do realize you just explained nothing more than having a higher income tax to pay for it.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It's not an income tax, it's a separate fund, not general revenue. To be able to access it you need to pay into it. and wouldn't the fact that people payed into it themselves not encourage them to take advantage of the program?

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

You are talking about a tax on income and not a personal discretionary fund, right? Like any payroll tax the only difference is how many different accounts the State chooses to keep it in, which is literally the least important aspect for me.

I do not want to pay any of my salary to give some chucklefuck who has his own job and income a free vacation just because he was able to breed.

I have compassion for people in dire straights, but at no time during the day do I think that the work I just did should be considered a "freebie" from me because everyone with a kid is more entitled to some of my labor.

If you want to be charitable start a voluntary charity and use your own money.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I have compassion for people in dire straights, but at no time during the day do I think that the work I just did should be considered a "freebie" from me because everyone with a kid is more entitled to some of my labor.

You do realize the system is set up to actually return to them part of their own labour right?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not by accident, whichever politicians push this get to consider "lottery winners" who get more than they put in to just be another vote purchased for their party, from the pockets of others.

[–]stormforce7916[S] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think it's possible for the mother to transfer some of her maternity leave to the father now up to a maximum of six months. Or at least that was the proposal.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Or they could do like Canada does and simply pay for it with Employment Insurance premiums that employees pay.

[–]jamminnummeruno 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As I always said, give men equal rights, and the wage gap disappears.

[–]redditorriot 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Anyone who thinks that the general push for fathers leave has anything to do with giving fathers rights is sorely mistaken.

Fathers leave is being pushed to (try to at least) benefit women.

[–]omegaphallic -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Payed Paternity leave and Maternity leave should be manadtory, with the exception of key critic jobs were one can not find a temp to fill in, such as elected office, being a soldier on the front lines of war, a doctor, and a few other key jobs.

The first months, even years of a childs life are their most impressionable and key to the parents nuerology as well.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

being a soldier

Who let's not go crazy now, I really liked being able to take parental leave.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

As we continue to favor women, men's lives will improve as well. Suuuuuure.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This is kind of the opposite if you read the article. Improve the lives of men, and the rest will follow suit.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Maybe. But it still smacks of having men act more like women so women can be more like men. And of course no mention of equality in family court. So now we let men get more attached to their kids before mommy rips them away when she loses attraction to hubby who is now acting more feminine.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Getting women to earn anything is just too fucking hard.

[–]Jonesey505 -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Ah so the plan is to turn women into men, and men into women. Sensible plan.

[–]AloysiusC 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They steal my banana. Grrrr. Give me banana.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter