Subject:
|
Re: Is this sexism?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 28 Jun 2001 22:16:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
465 times
|
| |
|
|
Duane Hess wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tom Stangl writes:
> > David Eaton wrote:
> >
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tom Stangl writes:
> > > > I would consider it sexist. I have no problem with giving the time off, but >to be fair you'd have to give men the same time off.
> > >
> > > How do you feel about maternity leave? Sexist? Should the husband get the
> > > same time off as the woman? Should they be paid? And yes, I do know some
> > > companies DO allow men to get time off. But it's certainly a lot more rare.
> >
> > Yes, yes, and no.
> >
> > This should really be in a separate thread, but...
> >
> > Women usually CHOOSE to get pregnant.
>
> Generally, I would say that this is the case, but not always. I'll leave
> that to another thread.
As I said in another post, though, whether they choose to GET pregnant isn't quite relevant. Whether they choose to STAY pregnant is
their choice.
> > I don't think they should get PAID time off for a medical condition they >CHOSE to have.
>
> I don't necessarily agree with this, but I see your point. How about LASIK
> or other elective surgeries? As far as I know most people (at least where I
> work)are able to get time off for them as well.
Lasik isn't relevant, really. I had it done, and was watching TV that night (I drove myself home, too, as I had one eye done one year,
one done another, taking advantage of the IRS tax laws). I DID take a half day off, however.
> > I also don't think parents should get paid Flex Time while denying it to >adults without children.
>
> You say "Flex Time". Are you referring to flexible work hours, or time off
> in compliance with family medical leave?
Both. There are companies out there that give Flex Time to people with kids, but don't seem to want to give it to people WITHOUT kids.
> > Again, they CHOSE to have kids, and
> > rewarding them for it/punishing others for NOT having kids just isn't right.
>
>
> Again, I don't agree with you, but you do have a valid point.
It's always a choice to have kids, even if it means travelling to another state to change the "medical condition".
My wife and I CHOSE to not have kids before we even got married.
--
| Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support
| Netscape Communications Corp
| A division of AOL Time Warner
| iPlanet Support - http://www.iplanet.com/support/
| Please do not associate my personal views with my employer
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Is this sexism?
|
| (...) Not touching that one... That's a whole other heat wave. (...) My point was that it's an *elective* surgery. Pregnancy is generally an elective condition. Should people who choose to have an elective health-related procedure done be entitled (...) (23 years ago, 28-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Is this sexism?
|
| (...) Generally, I would say that this is the case, but not always. I'll leave that to another thread. (...) I don't necessarily agree with this, but I see your point. How about LASIK or other elective surgeries? As far as I know most people (at (...) (23 years ago, 28-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
244 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
