MGTOWrama : A FEMINIZM CONSEQUENCE

[LordZuko]

This probably isn't on topic, but this is the topic where a bunch of dudes are whining and ranting about women and feminists, so it should be fair.

Anyway here is an article from the NYT.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/...gender.html?smid=pl-share&referer=android-app://com.google.android.gm

It's basically a chick whining about how boys and girls are raised differently. The thing that annoys me about shit like this is how these females refuse to understand that males and females are different. Why should boys and girls be raised the same? They shouldn't. She brings up that girls are raised more to be protective of themselves and their bodies. Well no shit. Women are the smaller weaker sex. There are bad men out there just like there are bad women. The difference is that it is far more likely that those bad men will be able to prey on unsuspecting women. Why wouldn't you try to prepare your daughter for that. Most of the article was about raising girls to "be good" and somehow making it seem like that was a bad thing. The writer even admits that the way we raise girls actually gives them an advantage in schools and other areas, then goes on to give some supposed bad side effects that aren't really backed by anything. For example, she points out that we raise them to be more caring about others and then says that can lead to women being subservient. How did she make that jump?

It's just ridiculous. I think these MGTOW dudes are lames, but I do get that shit like this is what births dudes like that. It seems like the path these women are pushing only leads to one of two places: either people become this culturally androgynous pit where biological sex has no meaning or men and women get tired of each and everyone goes their own way. Neither of those outcomes seems like a good thing.

If you think the topic or the men are lame why are you still visiting this thread?

 

[LordZuko]

Maternity nor Paternity leave are fair to the employer. It's not to an employer's benefit to pay for an employee to take up a space when they aren't producing. A woman having a child is a unilateral decision. Her job isn't involved, her man, if any, isn't involved. The only fair thing to do is to get rid of maternity leave all together.

Women should make a choice do you want to be a career woman or a mom. You can't do both effectively without making an uninvolved third party pay then you can't do both.

This is just foolish. Think about this from an owners point of view. Why have PTO? Why have sick days?

You pay people because of what they bring to the table, not because you want to pay them 60% of their salary for 6 weeks...

Shit like this is why millennials don't stay a job for more than 3 years.

You earn pto and you earn sick days. Every 40hours on the gig nets you x amount of pto and sick time. You can only accumulate a max for both days, they don't roll over and you have to request to use your pto.

With ml or pl that's six weeks per child and it doesn't matter when you get to the gig. It's just time the company has to give to you. Six weeks paying someone who isn't there because of a personal decision.

If you're not there for six weeks per child, You're not bringing shit to the table.

If i were an employer and had to choose between a career woman or man vs a baby factory, I'm choosing the former.

Not getting ml is not why millenials are leaving work. Millenials aren't even having babies like that. Thanks for pulling that shit out your ass and trying to present it as a golden nugget of truth.

What you aren't considering is that the woman that is out for 6 weeks may be a better employee than "career woman or man". That's why it's foolish to say such a blanket statement like that.

Millennials aren't staying on the job because of dumb employer decisions... Like you getting rid of maternity leave. They create environments for less employee loyalty.

WHAT employers want Is more freedom to do as they please..... if a woman is a great asset to the business then she should logically get maternity leave and businesses would be willing to give it to her if they value her enough. BUT DON'T force businesses to give that shit to women who are unworthy of it just because they are having a baby.

Millennials are spoiled rotten little shits.

Fam... It's 6 weeks... I don't need to argue this because most employers would be dumb to not do it at this point.

You keep saying six weeks as if that is some justifying in of itself.

A private company receives no benefit from having an employee taking six weeks off as a consequence for a personal decision.

 

[LPast]

Maternity nor Paternity leave are fair to the employer. It's not to an employer's benefit to pay for an employee to take up a space when they aren't producing. A woman having a child is a unilateral decision. Her job isn't involved, her man, if any, isn't involved. The only fair thing to do is to get rid of maternity leave all together.

Women should make a choice do you want to be a career woman or a mom. You can't do both effectively without making an uninvolved third party pay then you can't do both.

This is just foolish. Think about this from an owners point of view. Why have PTO? Why have sick days?

You pay people because of what they bring to the table, not because you want to pay them 60% of their salary for 6 weeks...

Shit like this is why millennials don't stay a job for more than 3 years.

You earn pto and you earn sick days. Every 40hours on the gig nets you x amount of pto and sick time. You can only accumulate a max for both days, they don't roll over and you have to request to use your pto.

With ml or pl that's six weeks per child and it doesn't matter when you get to the gig. It's just time the company has to give to you. Six weeks paying someone who isn't there because of a personal decision.

If you're not there for six weeks per child, You're not bringing shit to the table.

If i were an employer and had to choose between a career woman or man vs a baby factory, I'm choosing the former.

Not getting ml is not why millenials are leaving work. Millenials aren't even having babies like that. Thanks for pulling that shit out your ass and trying to present it as a golden nugget of truth.

What you aren't considering is that the woman that is out for 6 weeks may be a better employee than "career woman or man". That's why it's foolish to say such a blanket statement like that.

Millennials aren't staying on the job because of dumb employer decisions... Like you getting rid of maternity leave. They create environments for less employee loyalty.

WHAT employers want Is more freedom to do as they please..... if a woman is a great asset to the business then she should logically get maternity leave and businesses would be willing to give it to her if they value her enough. BUT DON'T force businesses to give that shit to women who are unworthy of it just because they are having a baby.

Millennials are spoiled rotten little shits.

Fam... It's 6 weeks... I don't need to argue this because most employers would be dumb to not do it at this point.

You keep saying six weeks as if that is some justifying in of itself.

A private company receives no benefit from having an employee taking six weeks off as a consequence for a personal decision.

As an employer, your benefit isn't the 6 weeks that your employee is on leave. Your benefit is from the employee being there for 46 other available weeks.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

This probably isn't on topic, but this is the topic where a bunch of dudes are whining and ranting about women and feminists, so it should be fair.

Anyway here is an article from the NYT.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/...gender.html?smid=pl-share&referer=android-app://com.google.android.gm

It's basically a chick whining about how boys and girls are raised differently. The thing that annoys me about shit like this is how these females refuse to understand that males and females are different. Why should boys and girls be raised the same? They shouldn't. She brings up that girls are raised more to be protective of themselves and their bodies. Well no shit. Women are the smaller weaker sex. There are bad men out there just like there are bad women. The difference is that it is far more likely that those bad men will be able to prey on unsuspecting women. Why wouldn't you try to prepare your daughter for that. Most of the article was about raising girls to "be good" and somehow making it seem like that was a bad thing. The writer even admits that the way we raise girls actually gives them an advantage in schools and other areas, then goes on to give some supposed bad side effects that aren't really backed by anything. For example, she points out that we raise them to be more caring about others and then says that can lead to women being subservient. How did she make that jump?

It's just ridiculous. I think these MGTOW dudes are lames, but I do get that shit like this is what births dudes like that. It seems like the path these women are pushing only leads to one of two places: either people become this culturally androgynous pit where biological sex has no meaning or men and women get tired of each and everyone goes their own way. Neither of those outcomes seems like a good thing.

If you think the topic or the men are lame why are you still visiting this thread?

I didn't say the topic was lame. It's worthwhile discussion. I said most of the MGTOW dudes are lame. That doesn't mean I can't have a conversation with them. Besides I haven't been in this topic to that extent anyway outside of a couple major back and forths.

 

[sunlord]

Maternity nor Paternity leave are fair to the employer. It's not to an employer's benefit to pay for an employee to take up a space when they aren't producing. A woman having a child is a unilateral decision. Her job isn't involved, her man, if any, isn't involved. The only fair thing to do is to get rid of maternity leave all together.

Women should make a choice do you want to be a career woman or a mom. You can't do both effectively without making an uninvolved third party pay then you can't do both.

This is just foolish. Think about this from an owners point of view. Why have PTO? Why have sick days?

You pay people because of what they bring to the table, not because you want to pay them 60% of their salary for 6 weeks...

Shit like this is why millennials don't stay a job for more than 3 years.

You earn pto and you earn sick days. Every 40hours on the gig nets you x amount of pto and sick time. You can only accumulate a max for both days, they don't roll over and you have to request to use your pto.

With ml or pl that's six weeks per child and it doesn't matter when you get to the gig. It's just time the company has to give to you. Six weeks paying someone who isn't there because of a personal decision.

If you're not there for six weeks per child, You're not bringing shit to the table.

If i were an employer and had to choose between a career woman or man vs a baby factory, I'm choosing the former.

Not getting ml is not why millenials are leaving work. Millenials aren't even having babies like that. Thanks for pulling that shit out your ass and trying to present it as a golden nugget of truth.

What you aren't considering is that the woman that is out for 6 weeks may be a better employee than "career woman or man". That's why it's foolish to say such a blanket statement like that.

Millennials aren't staying on the job because of dumb employer decisions... Like you getting rid of maternity leave. They create environments for less employee loyalty.

WHAT employers want Is more freedom to do as they please..... if a woman is a great asset to the business then she should logically get maternity leave and businesses would be willing to give it to her if they value her enough. BUT DON'T force businesses to give that shit to women who are unworthy of it just because they are having a baby.

Millennials are spoiled rotten little shits.

Fam... It's 6 weeks... I don't need to argue this because most employers would be dumb to not do it at this point.

You keep saying six weeks as if that is some justifying in of itself.

A private company receives no benefit from having an employee taking six weeks off as a consequence for a personal decision.

As an employer, your benefit isn't the 6 weeks that your employee is on leave. Your benefit is from the employee being there for 46 other available weeks.

Maternity nor Paternity leave are fair to the employer. It's not to an employer's benefit to pay for an employee to take up a space when they aren't producing. A woman having a child is a unilateral decision. Her job isn't involved, her man, if any, isn't involved. The only fair thing to do is to get rid of maternity leave all together.

Women should make a choice do you want to be a career woman or a mom. You can't do both effectively without making an uninvolved third party pay then you can't do both.

This is just foolish. Think about this from an owners point of view. Why have PTO? Why have sick days?

You pay people because of what they bring to the table, not because you want to pay them 60% of their salary for 6 weeks...

Shit like this is why millennials don't stay a job for more than 3 years.

You earn pto and you earn sick days. Every 40hours on the gig nets you x amount of pto and sick time. You can only accumulate a max for both days, they don't roll over and you have to request to use your pto.

With ml or pl that's six weeks per child and it doesn't matter when you get to the gig. It's just time the company has to give to you. Six weeks paying someone who isn't there because of a personal decision.

If you're not there for six weeks per child, You're not bringing shit to the table.

If i were an employer and had to choose between a career woman or man vs a baby factory, I'm choosing the former.

Not getting ml is not why millenials are leaving work. Millenials aren't even having babies like that. Thanks for pulling that shit out your ass and trying to present it as a golden nugget of truth.

What you aren't considering is that the woman that is out for 6 weeks may be a better employee than "career woman or man". That's why it's foolish to say such a blanket statement like that.

Millennials aren't staying on the job because of dumb employer decisions... Like you getting rid of maternity leave. They create environments for less employee loyalty.

WHAT employers want Is more freedom to do as they please..... if a woman is a great asset to the business then she should logically get maternity leave and businesses would be willing to give it to her if they value her enough. BUT DON'T force businesses to give that shit to women who are unworthy of it just because they are having a baby.

Millennials are spoiled rotten little shits.

Fam... It's 6 weeks... I don't need to argue this because most employers would be dumb to not do it at this point.

You keep saying six weeks as if that is some justifying in of itself.

A private company receives no benefit from having an employee taking six weeks off as a consequence for a personal decision.

As an employer, your benefit isn't the 6 weeks that your employee is on leave. Your benefit is from the employee being there for 46 other available weeks.

some employees are not worth the 6 weeks especially if I have to replace them.

While they are gone ON leave if the new person does a better job I won't want the original person back but I will have no choice but to hire back an inferior worker just because she had a baby.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

some employees are not worth the 6 weeks especially if I have to replace them.

While they are gone ON leave if the new person does a better job I won't want the original person back but I will have no choice but to hire back an inferior worker just because she had a baby.

That's actually an understandable gripe. That said, if you were fine with that worker before she left maternity leave, you shouldn't be so gung ho to get rid of her after she comes back. If her work was really so bad that you want to get rid of her, you should have just cause to do so regardless of her maternity status. There really ain't that many regulations guiding private business and their firing standards. If someone comes back from leave and you can demonstrated that that led to a reduction in productivity, you can fire them for sure. The only sector where that probably won't work is the Federal government.

 

[LordZuko]

Maternity nor Paternity leave are fair to the employer. It's not to an employer's benefit to pay for an employee to take up a space when they aren't producing. A woman having a child is a unilateral decision. Her job isn't involved, her man, if any, isn't involved. The only fair thing to do is to get rid of maternity leave all together.

Women should make a choice do you want to be a career woman or a mom. You can't do both effectively without making an uninvolved third party pay then you can't do both.

This is just foolish. Think about this from an owners point of view. Why have PTO? Why have sick days?

You pay people because of what they bring to the table, not because you want to pay them 60% of their salary for 6 weeks...

Shit like this is why millennials don't stay a job for more than 3 years.

You earn pto and you earn sick days. Every 40hours on the gig nets you x amount of pto and sick time. You can only accumulate a max for both days, they don't roll over and you have to request to use your pto.

With ml or pl that's six weeks per child and it doesn't matter when you get to the gig. It's just time the company has to give to you. Six weeks paying someone who isn't there because of a personal decision.

If you're not there for six weeks per child, You're not bringing shit to the table.

If i were an employer and had to choose between a career woman or man vs a baby factory, I'm choosing the former.

Not getting ml is not why millenials are leaving work. Millenials aren't even having babies like that. Thanks for pulling that shit out your ass and trying to present it as a golden nugget of truth.

What you aren't considering is that the woman that is out for 6 weeks may be a better employee than "career woman or man". That's why it's foolish to say such a blanket statement like that.

Millennials aren't staying on the job because of dumb employer decisions... Like you getting rid of maternity leave. They create environments for less employee loyalty.

WHAT employers want Is more freedom to do as they please..... if a woman is a great asset to the business then she should logically get maternity leave and businesses would be willing to give it to her if they value her enough. BUT DON'T force businesses to give that shit to women who are unworthy of it just because they are having a baby.

Millennials are spoiled rotten little shits.

Fam... It's 6 weeks... I don't need to argue this because most employers would be dumb to not do it at this point.

You keep saying six weeks as if that is some justifying in of itself.

A private company receives no benefit from having an employee taking six weeks off as a consequence for a personal decision.

As an employer, your benefit isn't the 6 weeks that your employee is on leave. Your benefit is from the employee being there for 46 other available weeks.

An employer does not benefit from an employee taking off six weeks. When they come back if they were top talent they have to be reintegrated because shit changes in a month. The world don't stop moving because she decides to have a baby.

Not to mention that women who have children put in less hours on the job. So an employer is not even getting the max effort from a returning employee.

Your principles are unsound.

 

[LordZuko]

This probably isn't on topic, but this is the topic where a bunch of dudes are whining and ranting about women and feminists, so it should be fair.

Anyway here is an article from the NYT.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/...gender.html?smid=pl-share&referer=android-app://com.google.android.gm

It's basically a chick whining about how boys and girls are raised differently. The thing that annoys me about shit like this is how these females refuse to understand that males and females are different. Why should boys and girls be raised the same? They shouldn't. She brings up that girls are raised more to be protective of themselves and their bodies. Well no shit. Women are the smaller weaker sex. There are bad men out there just like there are bad women. The difference is that it is far more likely that those bad men will be able to prey on unsuspecting women. Why wouldn't you try to prepare your daughter for that. Most of the article was about raising girls to "be good" and somehow making it seem like that was a bad thing. The writer even admits that the way we raise girls actually gives them an advantage in schools and other areas, then goes on to give some supposed bad side effects that aren't really backed by anything. For example, she points out that we raise them to be more caring about others and then says that can lead to women being subservient. How did she make that jump?

It's just ridiculous. I think these MGTOW dudes are lames, but I do get that shit like this is what births dudes like that. It seems like the path these women are pushing only leads to one of two places: either people become this culturally androgynous pit where biological sex has no meaning or men and women get tired of each and everyone goes their own way. Neither of those outcomes seems like a good thing.

If you think the topic or the men are lame why are you still visiting this thread?

I didn't say the topic was lame. It's worthwhile discussion. I said most of the MGTOW dudes are lame. That doesn't mean I can't have a conversation with them. Besides I haven't been in this topic to that extent anyway outside of a couple major back and forths.

So we're lame and you're what? Cool

Entertaining a conversation with some one so condescending is less than thrilling. There is no mutual exchange of ideas. The benefit is all yours because you can only cupcake the topic.

 

[LPast]

Maternity nor Paternity leave are fair to the employer. It's not to an employer's benefit to pay for an employee to take up a space when they aren't producing. A woman having a child is a unilateral decision. Her job isn't involved, her man, if any, isn't involved. The only fair thing to do is to get rid of maternity leave all together.

Women should make a choice do you want to be a career woman or a mom. You can't do both effectively without making an uninvolved third party pay then you can't do both.

This is just foolish. Think about this from an owners point of view. Why have PTO? Why have sick days?

You pay people because of what they bring to the table, not because you want to pay them 60% of their salary for 6 weeks...

Shit like this is why millennials don't stay a job for more than 3 years.

You earn pto and you earn sick days. Every 40hours on the gig nets you x amount of pto and sick time. You can only accumulate a max for both days, they don't roll over and you have to request to use your pto.

With ml or pl that's six weeks per child and it doesn't matter when you get to the gig. It's just time the company has to give to you. Six weeks paying someone who isn't there because of a personal decision.

If you're not there for six weeks per child, You're not bringing shit to the table.

If i were an employer and had to choose between a career woman or man vs a baby factory, I'm choosing the former.

Not getting ml is not why millenials are leaving work. Millenials aren't even having babies like that. Thanks for pulling that shit out your ass and trying to present it as a golden nugget of truth.

What you aren't considering is that the woman that is out for 6 weeks may be a better employee than "career woman or man". That's why it's foolish to say such a blanket statement like that.

Millennials aren't staying on the job because of dumb employer decisions... Like you getting rid of maternity leave. They create environments for less employee loyalty.

WHAT employers want Is more freedom to do as they please..... if a woman is a great asset to the business then she should logically get maternity leave and businesses would be willing to give it to her if they value her enough. BUT DON'T force businesses to give that shit to women who are unworthy of it just because they are having a baby.

Millennials are spoiled rotten little shits.

Fam... It's 6 weeks... I don't need to argue this because most employers would be dumb to not do it at this point.

You keep saying six weeks as if that is some justifying in of itself.

A private company receives no benefit from having an employee taking six weeks off as a consequence for a personal decision.

As an employer, your benefit isn't the 6 weeks that your employee is on leave. Your benefit is from the employee being there for 46 other available weeks.

Maternity nor Paternity leave are fair to the employer. It's not to an employer's benefit to pay for an employee to take up a space when they aren't producing. A woman having a child is a unilateral decision. Her job isn't involved, her man, if any, isn't involved. The only fair thing to do is to get rid of maternity leave all together.

Women should make a choice do you want to be a career woman or a mom. You can't do both effectively without making an uninvolved third party pay then you can't do both.

This is just foolish. Think about this from an owners point of view. Why have PTO? Why have sick days?

You pay people because of what they bring to the table, not because you want to pay them 60% of their salary for 6 weeks...

Shit like this is why millennials don't stay a job for more than 3 years.

You earn pto and you earn sick days. Every 40hours on the gig nets you x amount of pto and sick time. You can only accumulate a max for both days, they don't roll over and you have to request to use your pto.

With ml or pl that's six weeks per child and it doesn't matter when you get to the gig. It's just time the company has to give to you. Six weeks paying someone who isn't there because of a personal decision.

If you're not there for six weeks per child, You're not bringing shit to the table.

If i were an employer and had to choose between a career woman or man vs a baby factory, I'm choosing the former.

Not getting ml is not why millenials are leaving work. Millenials aren't even having babies like that. Thanks for pulling that shit out your ass and trying to present it as a golden nugget of truth.

What you aren't considering is that the woman that is out for 6 weeks may be a better employee than "career woman or man". That's why it's foolish to say such a blanket statement like that.

Millennials aren't staying on the job because of dumb employer decisions... Like you getting rid of maternity leave. They create environments for less employee loyalty.

WHAT employers want Is more freedom to do as they please..... if a woman is a great asset to the business then she should logically get maternity leave and businesses would be willing to give it to her if they value her enough. BUT DON'T force businesses to give that shit to women who are unworthy of it just because they are having a baby.

Millennials are spoiled rotten little shits.

Fam... It's 6 weeks... I don't need to argue this because most employers would be dumb to not do it at this point.

You keep saying six weeks as if that is some justifying in of itself.

A private company receives no benefit from having an employee taking six weeks off as a consequence for a personal decision.

As an employer, your benefit isn't the 6 weeks that your employee is on leave. Your benefit is from the employee being there for 46 other available weeks.

some employees are not worth the 6 weeks especially if I have to replace them.

While they are gone ON leave if the new person does a better job I won't want the original person back but I will have no choice but to hire back an inferior worker just because she had a baby.

Do you realize how much money you will lose with the loss of productivity with hiring a new employee?

I'm not talking about replacing a fast food employee. I'm talking about replacing a position something that is valued a bit more.

I think it takes 2+ years for a new employee to replace the productivity of an existing employee.

 

[LordZuko]

some employees are not worth the 6 weeks especially if I have to replace them.

While they are gone ON leave if the new person does a better job I won't want the original person back but I will have no choice but to hire back an inferior worker just because she had a baby.

That's actually an understandable gripe. That said, if you were fine with that worker before she left maternity leave, you shouldn't be so gung ho to get rid of her after she comes back. If her work was really so bad that you want to get rid of her, you should have just cause to do so regardless of her maternity status. There really ain't that many regulations guiding private business and their firing standards. If someone comes back from leave and you can demonstrated that that led to a reduction in productivity, you can fire them for sure. The only sector where that probably won't work is the Federal government.

It's not about whether an employee is inferior or adequate.

That's not the argument.

The position is why should a private company dole out money to an absent employee?

Why is a company subsidizing a personal decision?

The only way a nigga can disappear from the job and still get paid is if he got injured, on the job.

If a nigga gets hurt on his personal time, he gets to use his sick time and pto. You sick longer than that you most likely don't have a job coming back.

Did a bitch get pregnant on the job, was she working at a sperm bank and tripped butt naked in the supply closet?

Does her position requirements include her getting pregnant or expose her to the risk of getting pregnant?

No.

Ok then.

 

[sunlord]

Maternity nor Paternity leave are fair to the employer. It's not to an employer's benefit to pay for an employee to take up a space when they aren't producing. A woman having a child is a unilateral decision. Her job isn't involved, her man, if any, isn't involved. The only fair thing to do is to get rid of maternity leave all together.

Women should make a choice do you want to be a career woman or a mom. You can't do both effectively without making an uninvolved third party pay then you can't do both.

This is just foolish. Think about this from an owners point of view. Why have PTO? Why have sick days?

You pay people because of what they bring to the table, not because you want to pay them 60% of their salary for 6 weeks...

Shit like this is why millennials don't stay a job for more than 3 years.

You earn pto and you earn sick days. Every 40hours on the gig nets you x amount of pto and sick time. You can only accumulate a max for both days, they don't roll over and you have to request to use your pto.

With ml or pl that's six weeks per child and it doesn't matter when you get to the gig. It's just time the company has to give to you. Six weeks paying someone who isn't there because of a personal decision.

If you're not there for six weeks per child, You're not bringing shit to the table.

If i were an employer and had to choose between a career woman or man vs a baby factory, I'm choosing the former.

Not getting ml is not why millenials are leaving work. Millenials aren't even having babies like that. Thanks for pulling that shit out your ass and trying to present it as a golden nugget of truth.

What you aren't considering is that the woman that is out for 6 weeks may be a better employee than "career woman or man". That's why it's foolish to say such a blanket statement like that.

Millennials aren't staying on the job because of dumb employer decisions... Like you getting rid of maternity leave. They create environments for less employee loyalty.

WHAT employers want Is more freedom to do as they please..... if a woman is a great asset to the business then she should logically get maternity leave and businesses would be willing to give it to her if they value her enough. BUT DON'T force businesses to give that shit to women who are unworthy of it just because they are having a baby.

Millennials are spoiled rotten little shits.

Fam... It's 6 weeks... I don't need to argue this because most employers would be dumb to not do it at this point.

You keep saying six weeks as if that is some justifying in of itself.

A private company receives no benefit from having an employee taking six weeks off as a consequence for a personal decision.

As an employer, your benefit isn't the 6 weeks that your employee is on leave. Your benefit is from the employee being there for 46 other available weeks.

Maternity nor Paternity leave are fair to the employer. It's not to an employer's benefit to pay for an employee to take up a space when they aren't producing. A woman having a child is a unilateral decision. Her job isn't involved, her man, if any, isn't involved. The only fair thing to do is to get rid of maternity leave all together.

Women should make a choice do you want to be a career woman or a mom. You can't do both effectively without making an uninvolved third party pay then you can't do both.

This is just foolish. Think about this from an owners point of view. Why have PTO? Why have sick days?

You pay people because of what they bring to the table, not because you want to pay them 60% of their salary for 6 weeks...

Shit like this is why millennials don't stay a job for more than 3 years.

You earn pto and you earn sick days. Every 40hours on the gig nets you x amount of pto and sick time. You can only accumulate a max for both days, they don't roll over and you have to request to use your pto.

With ml or pl that's six weeks per child and it doesn't matter when you get to the gig. It's just time the company has to give to you. Six weeks paying someone who isn't there because of a personal decision.

If you're not there for six weeks per child, You're not bringing shit to the table.

If i were an employer and had to choose between a career woman or man vs a baby factory, I'm choosing the former.

Not getting ml is not why millenials are leaving work. Millenials aren't even having babies like that. Thanks for pulling that shit out your ass and trying to present it as a golden nugget of truth.

What you aren't considering is that the woman that is out for 6 weeks may be a better employee than "career woman or man". That's why it's foolish to say such a blanket statement like that.

Millennials aren't staying on the job because of dumb employer decisions... Like you getting rid of maternity leave. They create environments for less employee loyalty.

WHAT employers want Is more freedom to do as they please..... if a woman is a great asset to the business then she should logically get maternity leave and businesses would be willing to give it to her if they value her enough. BUT DON'T force businesses to give that shit to women who are unworthy of it just because they are having a baby.

Millennials are spoiled rotten little shits.

Fam... It's 6 weeks... I don't need to argue this because most employers would be dumb to not do it at this point.

You keep saying six weeks as if that is some justifying in of itself.

A private company receives no benefit from having an employee taking six weeks off as a consequence for a personal decision.

As an employer, your benefit isn't the 6 weeks that your employee is on leave. Your benefit is from the employee being there for 46 other available weeks.

some employees are not worth the 6 weeks especially if I have to replace them.

While they are gone ON leave if the new person does a better job I won't want the original person back but I will have no choice but to hire back an inferior worker just because she had a baby.

Do you realize how much money you will lose with the loss of productivity with hiring a new employee?

I'm not talking about replacing a fast food employee. I'm talking about replacing a position something that is valued a bit more.

I think it takes 2+ years for a new employee to replace the productivity of an existing employee.

^^^^ all that depends on the business and employee.... if you hire someone with more experience to replace the woman then no it really won't take 2 years to replace the productivity of an existing employee.

and the greater issue is that businesses should not be pressured to pay for maternity leave even if they lose money by getting rid of a pregnant woman and replacing them with someone else SO what?? business owners should be able to run their shit anyway they wish without social pressure to conform to the desires of feminist.

 

[2stepz_ahead]

There are dozens of philosophies in mgtow in accordance to the different types of mgtow.

There are some men who are only mgtow because they see that traditionalism is shunned, and that females have more power without responsibility. So they want a return to a common sense social contract. That's all traditionalism and gender roles are is a social contract between the sexes.

Traditionalism is a social contract that works only because men are the 100% source of the substances that females desire: food shelter clothing protection. Men were smart enough to decide that those who provide such amenities should be the ones in charge.

This set up works until civilization is advanced enough that females feel entitled to the system protecting them and forget that men imbue the system, without the men their is no system only a void. There's nothing that stands between a woman and her fear of everything that she thinks can happen.

Lol

Due to technology advances the economy is becoming more knowledge base...meaning more jobs that don't require physical strength...more jobs for women...less jobs of the past

Not to mention globalization

So considering women now can provide these things for themselves, why is traditionalism even necessary for anyone or attractive considering the constraints

Even, like I said, u argue traditional gender roles its more "efficient" shit is oppression

In a free society a man or woman should be able to choice to be a provider and or provided for...a home maker...stay at parent

Anything less is the opposite of freedom

Talk shit about modern feminism, I'll join you...but a lot of things u niggas advocate is no better

WELL I do advocate for traditionalism. It's either traditionalism or mgtow and the long term results of mgtow will either force women back into traditionalism or cause the collapse of western society.

and yes the economy is more knowledge based but the vast majority of women don't have the temperament or desire to stick to many of those stem careers. Traditionalism is not just about men providing for women because women cannot do so for themselves..... it is largely about protecting women from the bad impulses of men and protecting them from THE MEN of other societies this giving the protectors a feeling of responsibility/ownership over those women.

This made the men of any particular society care about the women in that society as it is now MEN HAVE STARTED TO not give a fuck about women.

social constraints are a good and needed without them men tend to not don't give a shit about their offspring. There are a lot of black men like this right now. freedom is not free is comes with conditions that must be met. what you feminist want in many cases resembles libertinism not liberty. YOU want to do whatever you want but you want society/men to pay for it.

What???

Men tend to not don't give a shit about their offspring???

Where do I begin...

This is not the stone age or medieval times for one

We pay ppl via taxes and other means to do the protecting and enforce order

Men and women have a role to play but its possible to structure a soceity whereas it does not come at the expense of the greater good and cost us a great deal of our personal freedoms...

I for example don't like how cs is calculated and enforced

And having been given the opportunity women have made gains in STEM industry so the desire is there...and while both genders have their strength and weaknesses, women have shown to be just as capable as men in most areas

So yes traditonalism is becoming obosolete... and I really don't see how u would actually get enough ppl to comply outside of physical force and government coercion

WITHOUT social constraints men tend not to give a fuck about their children..... back in the day a man would be considered less than garbage for not taking care of his lawful children today having bastard children has become almost normalized and just paying CHILD SUPPORT is not taking care of your child

MEN PAY TAXES AND MEN ENFORCE ORDER because they care about the safety of their property, we feel invested in society because we have wives children and property to protect without the wife and the children all that remains is selfish interest which means at the point men will no longer have any interest in protecting women or constraining our sexual behavior towards women.

PART of being an adult especially being a man is recognizing that personal freedoms must be sacrificed for the greater good, men have always accepted this as a natural part of being an adult man. Women however had to be forced to accept this and they resented this because of that women rebelled and created feminism to "free" them.

Now men in a sense have stated to rebel, so we have MGTOW. MEN AND WOMEN have to be united to sustains a cohesive society but today the genders are splitting apart.... which means things are collapsing at which point women will come crawling back to men because they won't be able to compete against more aggressive men who truly don't give a fuck about their feelings or notions of equality.... this has already begun many young women today have started to turn against feminism.

Most women hate stem they cannot sustain themselves in stem careers for very long they leave stem jobs after a few years. My argument is not that women are incapable of doing stem just that they don't like it because stem jobs come with a certain culture that feels very unnatural to the moods of women.

ahhhhh nah.

i know alot of black women in stem. they are doing very well for themselves.

now with that said.....alot of them cant be told shit either. they want the earning potential but thats ubntil a dude can come an "free" them of the burden of work.

i refuse to let my lady retire..because we can use her resources for our gain towards our retirement. her freinds call her weak for that. but none of them bitches happy either.

The statistics and numbers don't agree with you because women are vastly under represented in stem..... and the harder and more unforgivable the particular scientific field is less women you will find in it. In addition less than 10% of women graduate with stem degrees.

not sure what numbers or stats you got but i work around nothing but stem......it is a whole bunch of white chicks and i am seeing more black chicks getting into it...

an my niece is in it...an nothing but lil girls in her class.

women are going to it cause the pay is good as fukk.

i believe @kai is in the stem industry as well

 

[2stepz_ahead]

Its one thing to ask for respect, justice and recognition provided you ve earned them. When you want it handed out because of such and such reason, and above logic, you got it fucked up.

Feminist got tooo greedy. Now they are starting to eat the pie they have cooked.

Either they adapt to what they have created or they are humble enough to reconsider and negociate.

why must they adapt?

another nigga will kindly do what the last wont...an when he goes dry...shes on to the next.

these chicks aint got to slow down. an if they pretty with a nice body.....she got at least 5 niggas on rotation an dont mind being a hoes an taking money from any of them.

ask any nigga on here how many chicks he follows on IG or snapchat

 

[2stepz_ahead]

Now women got to PAY for male friendship.

bruh...we in europe...you know its chicks out there buying dikk.

 

[2stepz_ahead]

well yall gonna love what they do in Germany
http://howtoguide.org/maternity-leave-in-germany/

 

[2stepz_ahead]

This probably isn't on topic, but this is the topic where a bunch of dudes are whining and ranting about women and feminists, so it should be fair.

Anyway here is an article from the NYT.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/...gender.html?smid=pl-share&referer=android-app://com.google.android.gm

It's basically a chick whining about how boys and girls are raised differently. The thing that annoys me about shit like this is how these females refuse to understand that males and females are different. Why should boys and girls be raised the same? They shouldn't. She brings up that girls are raised more to be protective of themselves and their bodies. Well no shit. Women are the smaller weaker sex. There are bad men out there just like there are bad women. The difference is that it is far more likely that those bad men will be able to prey on unsuspecting women. Why wouldn't you try to prepare your daughter for that. Most of the article was about raising girls to "be good" and somehow making it seem like that was a bad thing. The writer even admits that the way we raise girls actually gives them an advantage in schools and other areas, then goes on to give some supposed bad side effects that aren't really backed by anything. For example, she points out that we raise them to be more caring about others and then says that can lead to women being subservient. How did she make that jump?

It's just ridiculous. I think these MGTOW dudes are lames, but I do get that shit like this is what births dudes like that. It seems like the path these women are pushing only leads to one of two places: either people become this culturally androgynous pit where biological sex has no meaning or men and women get tired of each and everyone goes their own way. Neither of those outcomes seems like a good thing.

If you think the topic or the men are lame why are you still visiting this thread?

I didn't say the topic was lame. It's worthwhile discussion. I said most of the MGTOW dudes are lame. That doesn't mean I can't have a conversation with them. Besides I haven't been in this topic to that extent anyway outside of a couple major back and forths.

that nigga called you cupcake

 

[loch121]

Briffault’s law maintains that “the female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.” Today we would say “relationship” rather than “association.”

We already know, of course, that women wield the ultimate veto power in the mating game. It is women who give thumbs-up or thumbs-down to any advances or proposals from men.

Briffault embellishes this truism by asserting that intimate relationships between men and women result from a calculated cost/benefit analysis by women. Will she or won’t she acquire a net gain from any relationship with the man? This does not necessarily mean monetary gain, although it might. Other types of gain might be social status, sexual compatibility, anticipated future happiness, emotional security, and the male’s capacity for fatherhood. Men, put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Yooooo I saw a video in a class I took years ago about briffault...made me check some ways I went about relationships. Good drop.

It doesn't matter, @atribecalledgabi. You're a woman. The things women do are deeply ingrained successful breeding tactics hundreds of thousands years old. You can't help but do these things.

It doesn't matter that I'm a woman. If you're consciously aware of a certain behavior you either gon consciously keep doing it or you're not. If that wasn't possible there would be mgtow.

Anyways. Happy turkey day nigga.

How many times have you as a grown woman cried to get your way?

Or explicitly or implicitly offered pussy to get a man who had no previous interests to do things for you?

You are who you are.

If I said never, then what? Exactly.

But you probly don't believe it so....

Happy turkey day bro

Never believe anything a woman says. Believe her actions. You lie to yourself. And think its the truth. So you could never be honest.

Perhaps you don't do these things to the degree of the worst, but you still do them.

This shit had me dying.

Basically a lot of Women are like the dude in Momento

 

[The Lonious Monk]

So we're lame and you're what? Cool

Entertaining a conversation with some one so condescending is less than thrilling. There is no mutual exchange of ideas. The benefit is all yours because you can only cupcake the topic.

I am whatever I am. I didn't even specify you as being one of the lames. But if the terms sings to you and feels like it's a good fit, t hen it is what it is.

And you niggas ain't interested in a mutual exchange of ideas because anybody that disagrees with you is illogical or can't control his feelings or is a blue pill cuck. So don't cry about condescension when damn near your whole philosophy is built on knocking other people down.

 

[sunlord]

There are dozens of philosophies in mgtow in accordance to the different types of mgtow.

There are some men who are only mgtow because they see that traditionalism is shunned, and that females have more power without responsibility. So they want a return to a common sense social contract. That's all traditionalism and gender roles are is a social contract between the sexes.

Traditionalism is a social contract that works only because men are the 100% source of the substances that females desire: food shelter clothing protection. Men were smart enough to decide that those who provide such amenities should be the ones in charge.

This set up works until civilization is advanced enough that females feel entitled to the system protecting them and forget that men imbue the system, without the men their is no system only a void. There's nothing that stands between a woman and her fear of everything that she thinks can happen.

Lol

Due to technology advances the economy is becoming more knowledge base...meaning more jobs that don't require physical strength...more jobs for women...less jobs of the past

Not to mention globalization

So considering women now can provide these things for themselves, why is traditionalism even necessary for anyone or attractive considering the constraints

Even, like I said, u argue traditional gender roles its more "efficient" shit is oppression

In a free society a man or woman should be able to choice to be a provider and or provided for...a home maker...stay at parent

Anything less is the opposite of freedom

Talk shit about modern feminism, I'll join you...but a lot of things u niggas advocate is no better

WELL I do advocate for traditionalism. It's either traditionalism or mgtow and the long term results of mgtow will either force women back into traditionalism or cause the collapse of western society.

and yes the economy is more knowledge based but the vast majority of women don't have the temperament or desire to stick to many of those stem careers. Traditionalism is not just about men providing for women because women cannot do so for themselves..... it is largely about protecting women from the bad impulses of men and protecting them from THE MEN of other societies this giving the protectors a feeling of responsibility/ownership over those women.

This made the men of any particular society care about the women in that society as it is now MEN HAVE STARTED TO not give a fuck about women.

social constraints are a good and needed without them men tend to not don't give a shit about their offspring. There are a lot of black men like this right now. freedom is not free is comes with conditions that must be met. what you feminist want in many cases resembles libertinism not liberty. YOU want to do whatever you want but you want society/men to pay for it.

What???

Men tend to not don't give a shit about their offspring???

Where do I begin...

This is not the stone age or medieval times for one

We pay ppl via taxes and other means to do the protecting and enforce order

Men and women have a role to play but its possible to structure a soceity whereas it does not come at the expense of the greater good and cost us a great deal of our personal freedoms...

I for example don't like how cs is calculated and enforced

And having been given the opportunity women have made gains in STEM industry so the desire is there...and while both genders have their strength and weaknesses, women have shown to be just as capable as men in most areas

So yes traditonalism is becoming obosolete... and I really don't see how u would actually get enough ppl to comply outside of physical force and government coercion

WITHOUT social constraints men tend not to give a fuck about their children..... back in the day a man would be considered less than garbage for not taking care of his lawful children today having bastard children has become almost normalized and just paying CHILD SUPPORT is not taking care of your child

MEN PAY TAXES AND MEN ENFORCE ORDER because they care about the safety of their property, we feel invested in society because we have wives children and property to protect without the wife and the children all that remains is selfish interest which means at the point men will no longer have any interest in protecting women or constraining our sexual behavior towards women.

PART of being an adult especially being a man is recognizing that personal freedoms must be sacrificed for the greater good, men have always accepted this as a natural part of being an adult man. Women however had to be forced to accept this and they resented this because of that women rebelled and created feminism to "free" them.

Now men in a sense have stated to rebel, so we have MGTOW. MEN AND WOMEN have to be united to sustains a cohesive society but today the genders are splitting apart.... which means things are collapsing at which point women will come crawling back to men because they won't be able to compete against more aggressive men who truly don't give a fuck about their feelings or notions of equality.... this has already begun many young women today have started to turn against feminism.

Most women hate stem they cannot sustain themselves in stem careers for very long they leave stem jobs after a few years. My argument is not that women are incapable of doing stem just that they don't like it because stem jobs come with a certain culture that feels very unnatural to the moods of women.

ahhhhh nah.

i know alot of black women in stem. they are doing very well for themselves.

now with that said.....alot of them cant be told shit either. they want the earning potential but thats ubntil a dude can come an "free" them of the burden of work.

i refuse to let my lady retire..because we can use her resources for our gain towards our retirement. her freinds call her weak for that. but none of them bitches happy either.

The statistics and numbers don't agree with you because women are vastly under represented in stem..... and the harder and more unforgivable the particular scientific field is less women you will find in it. In addition less than 10% of women graduate with stem degrees.

not sure what numbers or stats you got but i work around nothing but stem......it is a whole bunch of white chicks and i am seeing more black chicks getting into it...

an my niece is in it...an nothing but lil girls in her class.

women are going to it cause the pay is good as fukk.

i believe @kai is in the stem industry as well

nah
http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/w...ering-and-mathematics-stem#footnote52_8s1mpe7

and black women are especially underrepresented.

 

[LPast]

What would teach the next generation so men don't need to go their own way?