|
|
 | | Re: Is this sexism?
|
| (...) It certainly provides extra benefit to one sex (or both, if men get paid more because of it). Is that bad? I guess I think it's not ideal. (...) I don't think so. I can't pinpoint the differences, but it seems to me that men and women think (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Is this sexism?
|
| This is a non-issue if we pay workers for the work they do - not the time they spend at work. If we don't do this (it is not always possible), but give women 10% of the time off work, then it makes employers (esp. small ones) less likely to employ (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Is this sexism?
|
| (...) Well, depends how you define sexist, I guess :) Does it make sense? Sure. Is the impulse for you to suggest such a thing solely based on the fact that you personally (and women in general) would "benefit" from it (actually, as you implied, it (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Is this sexism?
|
| I'll try not to make this a long ramble, but a short and to-the-point suggestion, and a few questions. I think that companies should give women a day (possibly two) sick days off per month to deal with the physical symptoms of their menstrual cycle. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | What the heck?
|
| Lugnet said I was not allowed to post to lugnet.general in an earlier post. Someone please explain to me how I would not be allowed to post to lugnet.general? Here is the infamous red words you get when you screw up... Results: Your message was not (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
