The Money Mustache Community
General Discussion => Welcome and General Discussion => Topic started by: coppertop on February 18, 2015, 12:04:56 PM
-
well, read it for yourself:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/the-25-cent-raise-what-life-is-like-after-a-minimum-wage-increase/ar-BBhGV7E
Some of the details in the article change the impression one gets from the headline.
-
Eh. I can still feel sorry for her. Having never hit rock bottom, I can't say what I would or wouldn't do. Reference: Trading Places (movie).
-
And her family is about to grow — another grandchild who will live with her. The baby girl is expected sometime this month. Tippen will be buying the diapers.
Two words: BIRTH CONTROL.
EDIT: Another two words: CLOTH DIAPERS!
Although, I'm surprised she's even working. She'd probably make more money by quitting her job and getting on Welfare.
-
And her family is about to grow — another grandchild who will live with her. The baby girl is expected sometime this month. Tippen will be buying the diapers.
Two words: BIRTH CONTROL.
Although, I'm surprised she's even working. She'd probably make more money by quitting her job and getting on Welfare.
Do you have even the slightest clue how the EITC works?
-
Do you have even the slightest clue how the EITC works?
Yes I do. I even received it in 2003. But what does EITC have to do with welfare?
-
And her family is about to grow — another grandchild who will live with her. The baby girl is expected sometime this month. Tippen will be buying the diapers.
Two words: BIRTH CONTROL.
EDIT: Another two words: CLOTH DIAPERS!
Although, I'm surprised she's even working. She'd probably make more money by quitting her job and getting on Welfare.
So, she's not the one that has the birth control issue. Her daughter (son?) may be on welfare. Not sure that she'd qualify.
I actually sympathize - she's in a bit of a tough spot if she doesn't want to kick her kids (and their kids) out. Hard to tell from the article why they haven't gotten a job of any kind to help with expenses.
Cloth diapers requires an initial outlay she may not have.
-
Yeah, I feel sorry for her, but I also want to say, "Well, what do you expect?" If your skills don't allow you to earn more than a teenager, why do you think you can live comfortably? It's just like I want to say to my cousin's wife, when she complains about his lack of income, "You married a high school drop out with a serious drug addiction and a criminal record longer than his work history, and then you had a baby too soon. Did you think you'd be a stay-at-home mom, live in a nice two-story brick house and take a nice vacation every summer?"
Back to the lady in the article: Her own shortcomings are most likely echoed by her daughter -- otherwise why would she be buying necessities for her child's child? And I agree that she should look into ways to stretch her resources; however, she's not likely to go with cloth diapers -- that requires a fairly substantial up-front payment, and something tells me she probably doesn't have a washer/dryer of her own. She's probably never going to get out of this situation.
It's terribly sad, but the extra $2 per day isn't going to do anything for her.
-
Cloth diapers requires an initial outlay she may not have
Just for curiosity I googled Walmart cloth diapers. She could buy 20 cloth diapers for less than one pack of disposables. If she used the money she saved doing that to wash them one time she would break even.
-
"her family is about to grow — another grandchild who will live with her. The baby girl is expected sometime this month. Tippen will be buying the diapers."
Why the fuck will another child be living with her and she be "buying the diapers"? OK, neither of my grandmas ever bought me diapers, my mom never bought my nieces and nephews diapers, and I know of no longstanding tradition anywhere where it's up to gammy to be buying nappies. The fact that your nan didn't buy you diapers and support you doesn't mean you're affluent. This isn't a sad tale of poverty, this sound like wretched people making more people to live in wretchedness with them. What are all the parents of these kids doing? No income? Just laying around having sex and passing them off to their moms? Well, their own jailbird mom obviously didn't do a great job in raising them either. Cripes, what's the point in keeping a child if you can't provide properly and pass them off to someone else anyway. Adoption used to actually be a thing. Usually a very good thing for the child's future. ...Anyway.
Best case safety --> Mom, dad, grandma, and grandpa.
Worst case safety net --> Just grandma.
Why is the latter suddenly an A-OK thing to do and it's normal and nobody ever questions or says, "Yo, WTF?"? Where are the men for gods sakes?!!
-
I can feel sorry for her.
For one thing, she's a year younger than me with a grandchild my younger son's age. Ouch.
She has a job and she is paying the bills. I admire her for taking care of the grandchild and buying the diapers.
She can buy cloth diapers BUT - does she have access to laundry? That's a big thing, and she has to have the baby's parents (who are not working) be willing to actually wash the diapers.
But yeah, her kids shouldn't be having kids. It's a tough one. On one hand "tough love", make the kids take care of themselves, don't reward their bad behavior.
On the other hand, she's taking care of her family, so I have to admire that.
-
"her family is about to grow — another grandchild who will live with her. The baby girl is expected sometime this month. Tippen will be buying the diapers."
Why the fuck will another child be living with her and she be "buying the diapers"? OK, neither of my grandmas ever bought me diapers, my mom never bought my nieces and nephews diapers, and I know of no longstanding tradition anywhere where it's up to gammy to be buying nappies. The fact that your nan didn't buy you diapers and support you doesn't mean you're affluent. This isn't a sad tale of poverty, this sound like wretched people making more people to live in wretchedness with them. What are all the parents of these kids doing? No income? Just laying around having sex and passing them off to their moms? Well, their own jailbird mom obviously didn't do a great job in raising them either. Cripes, what's the point in keeping a child if you can't provide properly and pass them off to someone else anyway. Adoption used to actually be a thing. Usually a very good thing for the child's future. ...Anyway.
Best case safety --> Mom, dad, grandma, and grandpa.
Worst case safety net --> Just grandma.
Why is the latter suddenly an A-OK thing to do and it's normal and nobody ever questions or says, "Yo, WTF?"? Where are the men for gods sakes?!!
It's not exactly a new thing either.
I have a sister born in 1964. To my mom, who was a single mom at the time because the guy really wasn't interested in helping out. So yeah, my sister lived with my grandparents while my mom worked and drove home every weekend.
-
I thought a lot of the same things Kaspian.
@mm1970 - since when do you have to have access to a laundry?
Hell, my Grandmother raised 13 kids w/o a damn laundry. Does she have access to a sink? a creek? a tub? I see those laying along side the road thrown away. pish posh. Somebody teach these folks to get up off their arses and take care of their kids or don't be popping them out for Grandma to take care of. Tells me Grandma is a soft touch. Somebody needs to grow some, possibly drive on over to a larger town in Arkansas and get a j.o.b. Heck fire, get three. I did at one time. It was a pain. Funny, my Mom didn't have to raise my kids either.
-
It's not exactly a new thing either.
I have a sister born in 1964. To my mom, who was a single mom at the time because the guy really wasn't interested in helping out. So yeah, my sister lived with my grandparents while my mom worked and drove home every weekend.
Whether or not he ends up being a skeezebag that you don't want anywhere near your kid, it's the male point of view which pisses me off completely. Even if there is little or no contact, a guy should still be doing everything in his power to make sure that a kid is financially provided for. All you need is a bank routing number to provide the deposits. I know that's not the reality. I know there are shitty dads. (Who aren't even dads 'cause they never showed up for anything.) And shitty single moms who smoke and drink around their kids, don't look for work, and spend their child allowance on stupid stuff. There are stereotypes and everything in between. I just don't understand when a vicious multi-generation cycle of intellectual impairment happens. ...Or maybe that's just it? Bad genes running amok.
-
hmmmm...reminds me of a country sentiment..."Every good cowgirl needs to know how to keep her calves together."
Choices people. CHOICES. And choices have consequences. Sometimes very long ones. Multi-generational even.
-
hmmmm...reminds me of a country sentiment..."Every good cowgirl needs to know how to keep her calves together."
Choices people. CHOICES. And choices have consequences. Sometimes very long ones. Multi-generational even.
Right, cause birth control and sexual activity should be the sole responsibility of the woman.
Since, you know, men don't have any part in making babies or anything.
AFIAK, that article did not even mention if the grandma's live-in children were male or female; for all we know they're young men taking on semi-responsibility for their children (or rather, foisting responsibility for their children off on their mother).
-
Nope, not excusing Dads either. One or both parents should be working to support the children. Not Grandma.
edited to add: As I said, it's about choices. As a young lady I didn't have sex outside of marriage if I couldn't of afforded the child it would have produced.
-
Federally, the $10.10 proposal has gone nowhere in Congress. Supporters say the increase is essential just to return the minimum to its (inflation-adjusted) value of 40 years ago. In 1968, somebody could live above the poverty line with a family of three on a full-time minimum wage job. Now that same worker is below the poverty line with a family of two.
They got so close with this one! They recognize inflation has made their money worthless, impoverished workers and families. They even chose to compare wages to 1968, a few years before the last bit of the gold standard was eliminated and the fed could print as much money out of thin air as their evil little hearts desired. Yet instead of demanding an end to the government's inflationary monetary policy that created their current situation of substantially devalued money and saddles the unborn with trillions of debt, they want more of what keeps them down: inflation and minimum wage. It's truly insanity!
-
Nope, not excusing Dads either. One or both parents should be working to support the children. Not Grandma.
Your quote placed the entire responsibility on the 'cowgirl' for not keeping her legs closed.
Honestly, this type of situation is a product of abstinence only sex education in public schools and systematic closing of low-income women's health centers.
I had a roommate once who legitimately thought pulling out was a decent enough BC method, despite one oopsies kid and several scares (with two different women...). Major difference: the state he went to public HS in taught abstinence; mine taught legitimate sex ed.
-
Sorry caliq, I didn't have a good quote in mind for a guy keeping it in his pants.
At any rate, any body who can't afford the possibility of a child had best be keeping celibate, or have awfully good 'protection'., or be willing to support the child or give it up for adoption. ABSTINENCE is a choice. On both parties part. A darn good one at that. So, because he wanted to do the deed, she lost her head and didn't make a good decision for herself? I'm not going to excuse either one of them.
-
Nope, not excusing Dads either. One or both parents should be working to support the children. Not Grandma.
edited to add: As I said, it's about choices. As a young lady I didn't have sex outside of marriage if I couldn't of afforded the child it would have produced.
Meh. An abortion would have done the same thing.
I'm pro-choice too.
-
Sorry caliq, I didn't have a good quote in mind for a guy keeping it in his pants.
At any rate, any body who can't afford the possibility of a child had best be keeping celibate, or have awfully good 'protection'., or be willing to support the child or give it up for adoption. ABSTINENCE is a choice. On both parties part. A darn good one at that. So, because he wanted to do the deed, she lost her head and didn't make a good decision for herself? I'm not going to excuse either one of them.
It's really unrealistic to expect people (especially young people) to be abstinent. Yes, it is technically a choice, but there are actually strong biological urges that make it a much harder choice to make. The rational, logical thing to do is realize that sex is natural and inevitable, and should be undertaken in the safest way possible -- this means actually educating young people and making low cost/free protection readily available. The religious lobby in this country has got a stranglehold on this issue and it's sickening and not healthy for a lot of parents, children, and the country as a whole.
Edit: And BPA brings up a good point -- if there was reasonable, unrestricted access to abortions throughout this country, a lot of these situations would be resolved.
I wasn't saying you should excuse either of them; just saying you should place the responsibility 50/50, not 0/100 as you appeared to. Apologies if you somehow didn't mean to do that, despite only quoting something to the effect of 'darn sluts need to keep their legs closed.'
-
Nope, not excusing Dads either.
Your quote placed the entire responsibility on the 'cowgirl' for not keeping her legs closed.
Sorry caliq, I didn't have a good quote in mind for a guy keeping it in his pants.
The very fact that you cannot get a good quote shows you how much responsibility is put on women.
-
Honestly, this type of situation is a product of abstinence only sex education in public schools and systematic closing of low-income women's health centers.
This!
My parents & education taught abstinence. Result: Had an 'oopsie' kid when I was 21 (I'm 34 now and still have only one).
My wife's parents & education taught abstinence. Result: Had two 'oopsie' kids when she was 21 (She's 49 now and still only has two).
My wife taught her two aforementioned kids BIRTH CONTROL!!! Result: They're both mid 20's now and married/engaged and have no kids at all.
Nope, not excusing Dads either.
Your quote placed the entire responsibility on the 'cowgirl' for not keeping her legs closed.
Sorry caliq, I didn't have a good quote in mind for a guy keeping it in his pants.
The very fact that you cannot get a good quote shows you how much responsibility is put on women.
Let's face it; if a man is not careful with casual sex, he could have kids that he never knows about, and never pays a dime for if mom can't track him down.
If a woman is not careful with casual sex, she has to deal with it (one way or another) regardless of if there's a dad in the picture or not.
-
Nope, not excusing Dads either.
Your quote placed the entire responsibility on the 'cowgirl' for not keeping her legs closed.
Sorry caliq, I didn't have a good quote in mind for a guy keeping it in his pants.
The very fact that you cannot get a good quote shows you how much responsibility is put on women.
Let's face it; if a man is not careful with casual sex, he could have kids that he never knows about, and never pays a dime for if mom can't track him down.
If a woman is not careful with casual sex, she has to deal with it (one way or another) regardless of if there's a dad in the picture or not.
[/quote]
Which is exactly why we need unrestricted access to abortions.
-
The responsibility isn't PUT on women. Unless it's a child of rape the woman chose to be in that position. They both did. Grandma sure as hell wasn't the likely one who chose for them to get pregnant, did she? Did the community at large? Who decided to have the 'I'm sure it was fantastic' sex and have a kid?????
People have the urge to throttle, stab, murder someone.
People have the urge to have sex w/minor children.
People have the urge to rape.
People have urges. So the hell what??? Life is all furry and fun for them forever after???? Just because they could not control their urges??? PLEASE.
Choices have consequences. Cause and effect. Sex can lead to children who have ongoing needs. Better decide before you chose to participate if YOU can deal with the consequences.
I never stated that I wasn't into teaching birth control.
I didn't say I couldn't GET a quote...just didn't have one in my head.
BUT, I'm pretty darn sure she didn't fall on a banana and end up on his *whatchie* by accident!
Written as a mother to two adopted children with ongoing medical needs from the resultant oopsies of two consenting people who could not keep them. Maybe would not support them????? Maybe had they given a thought to what the hell they were doing these two wouldn't have the problems they have today and will have for the rest of their lives. Sorry, just because we are dumb and stupid about protecting ourselves whether it be by abstaining, protecting ourself, taking bc or whatever, OUR CHOICES have consequences. Sometimes lifetime ones for ourselves and Other People. Let me think, AIDS, STDS, birth defects, lifetime poverty, etc., etc., etc.
An urge is not a good reason to find yourself with a child. But if it did? Get off your butt and support it. Don't lay it off on Grandma.
-
BUT, I'm pretty darn sure she didn't fall on a banana and end up on his *whatchie* by accident!
Again you are laying the blame for the pregnancy on the woman.
But I agree that it's not grandma's responsibility.
"Whatchie" is funny. Way funnier than penis.
-
No I'm not. I'm speaking as a woman who KEPT MYSELF from becoming financially responsible for something I could not handle on my OWN.
Certainly does take two to tango. If you care to read my initial response I spoke of THEIR kids and THEIR responsibility.
-
BUT, I'm pretty darn sure she didn't fall on a banana and end up on his *whatchie* by accident!
-
Sorry caliq, I didn't have a good quote in mind for a guy keeping it in his pants.
At any rate, any body who can't afford the possibility of a child had best be keeping celibate, or have awfully good 'protection'., or be willing to support the child or give it up for adoption. ABSTINENCE is a choice. On both parties part. A darn good one at that. So, because he wanted to do the deed, she lost her head and didn't make a good decision for herself? I'm not going to excuse either one of them.
So only men want sex and the woman loses her head (lay back and think of England) and didn't make a good decision for herself? Sorry, that is sexist. I am a woman. I like sex. I don't "lose my head" because some guy manipulated me. I have sex because I want to have it.
This is admittedly getting off-topic, so I won't comment about this particular aspect again, but your ideas about men and women in sexual relationships seem a bit narrow.
Again, I agree that it's not Grandma's responsibility.
-
Certainly off topic.
At any rate, any body who can't afford the possibility of a child had best be keeping celibate, or have awfully good 'protection'., or be willing to support the child or give it up for adoption. ABSTINENCE is a choice. On both parties part. A darn good one at that. So, because he wanted to do the deed, she lost her head and didn't make a good decision for herself? I'm not going to excuse either one of them.
So only men want sex and the woman loses her head (lay back and think of England) and didn't make a good decision for herself? Sorry, that is sexist. I am a woman. I like sex. I don't "lose my head" because some guy manipulated me. I have sex because I want to have it.
This is admittedly getting off-topic, so I won't comment about this particular aspect again, but your ideas about men and women in sexual relationships seem a bit narrow.
Again, I agree that it's not Grandma's responsibility.
Nope, said ANY BODY. Could be equally a guy getting himself into this position. I'm fairly certain he didn't slip on a banana and slide into her 'vajaja' by accident either.
I like sex too. Often was the female initiator. BUT, only with the thought in mind that I, ME, MYSELF - COULD AFFORD the consequences if it did end in a child and the fellow didn't do the right thing. Before that became a financial reality I DID NOT put MYSELF in that position.
It would appear that you are the one who seems to think that a woman who has sex has no ability to make a RATIONAL DECISION for herself based on the facts of life. Sex=possibility of child. What, are we not equal to that intellectual task that would lead us to be responsible for ourselves???? ...and anyone that we co-create?????
-
hmmmm...reminds me of a country sentiment..."Every good cowgirl needs to know how to keep her calves together."
Choices people. CHOICES. And choices have consequences. Sometimes very long ones. Multi-generational even.
Right, cause birth control and sexual activity should be the sole responsibility of the woman.
Since, you know, men don't have any part in making babies or anything.
AFIAK, that article did not even mention if the grandma's live-in children were male or female; for all we know they're young men taking on semi-responsibility for their children (or rather, foisting responsibility for their children off on their mother).
+1
"Don't have sex", yeah, okay, that's worked...never.
I can probably tick off 10 people without stopping who got pregnant as teens out of wedlock. With a variety of outcomes, including legal abortion, single parenting, and marriage.
It doesn't necessarily HAVE to turn out to be a multi-generational thing. In my family, it was a strong family unit (speaking even to very extended family), so whether it resulted in marriage or not, everything turned out just fine. My sister is married with an adult son and a stable job and a paid-for house.
I mean, what do you do when your mother had her kids at 19 and 20? Have your kids at 19 and 20? I'd judge, but say - that's when people had their kids in my family (not me, obv.) My aunt had her first kid at 19 and her last kid at 38 (right after her first grandkid was born). She was widowed pretty young and her last kid got pregnant in HS as a teenager. Well, terrible and all, right? But dang it if my young pregnant-teen cousin didn't go on to marry the guy and get a PhD in physics and have a son who got a full-ride engineering scholarship.
-
Nope, not excusing Dads either. One or both parents should be working to support the children. Not Grandma.
edited to add: As I said, it's about choices. As a young lady I didn't have sex outside of marriage if I couldn't of afforded the child it would have produced.
Seeing how late a lot of people get married, I don't consider that a very realistic option. But then again, I used 2 forms of BC (sometimes 3!) and of course, you know, there's always legal termination.
-
I thought a lot of the same things Kaspian.
@mm1970 - since when do you have to have access to a laundry?
Hell, my Grandmother raised 13 kids w/o a damn laundry. Does she have access to a sink? a creek? a tub? I see those laying along side the road thrown away. pish posh. Somebody teach these folks to get up off their arses and take care of their kids or don't be popping them out for Grandma to take care of. Tells me Grandma is a soft touch. Somebody needs to grow some, possibly drive on over to a larger town in Arkansas and get a j.o.b. Heck fire, get three. I did at one time. It was a pain. Funny, my Mom didn't have to raise my kids either.
Oh come on, who ACTUALLY knows how to do laundry in a sink or a tub? These are skills that have been lost over the generations. I used to help my neighbor do her laundry with a tub, but then again, we weren't washing diapers.
-
Ummm, I do. Dip, rinse, scrub, dip, rinse. hang to dry. LOST ART? Wow. How difficult.
-
Nope, not excusing Dads either. One or both parents should be working to support the children. Not Grandma.
edited to add: As I said, it's about choices. As a young lady I didn't have sex outside of marriage if I couldn't of afforded the child it would have produced.
Seeing how late a lot of people get married, I don't consider that a very realistic option. But then again, I used 2 forms of BC (sometimes 3!) and of course, you know, there's always legal termination.
See that's why we need legit sex ed.
People think pulling out or using a condom is basically 100% effective. News flash: it ain't. Not by a lot. Even a condom is only like 70% effective in the hands of the population because people don't always use them properly (another argument for sex ed! Bananas, anyone?) Same for BC pills --99.8% effective when used properly under supervision of clinical trial scientists; significantly less effective in the real world.
If you want to have casual sex with impunity, you really need at least a hormonal and a barrier. Soooo many of my peers don't realize this. I realize this because my sex ed class was *very* comprehensive. And because I have educated parents who were very open and put me on BC at 15 when I got into my first serious relationship, no questions asked. I was very lucky to have those advantages.
KD, I admire your sense of responsibility towards kids. However, I don't think your line of thinking is applicable to the entire population.
Also, I don't care whether you've handwashed laundry before or not -- no way would I want anything to do with a poopy diaper without a washing machine. Nope, nope, nope.
-
Do you have even the slightest clue how the EITC works?
Yes I do. I even received it in 2003. But what does EITC have to do with welfare?
If you understood the EITC, then you wouldn't need to ask that question. But since you did, the EITC is set up in such a way that each additional dollar earned, up to a certain point, increases the tax credit proportionally. If you have dependent children, then there is really no way to make more money from welfare than from working.
-
Nope, not excusing Dads either. One or both parents should be working to support the children. Not Grandma.
edited to add: As I said, it's about choices. As a young lady I didn't have sex outside of marriage if I couldn't of afforded the child it would have produced.
Seeing how late a lot of people get married, I don't consider that a very realistic option. But then again, I used 2 forms of BC (sometimes 3!) and of course, you know, there's always legal termination.
See that's why we need legit sex ed.
People think pulling out or using a condom is basically 100% effective. News flash: it ain't. Not by a lot. Even a condom is only like 70% effective in the hands of the population because people don't always use them properly (another argument for sex ed! Bananas, anyone?) Same for BC pills --99.8% effective when used properly under supervision of clinical trial scientists; significantly less effective in the real world.
If you want to have casual sex with impunity, you really need at least a hormonal and a barrier. Soooo many of my peers don't realize this. I realize this because my sex ed class was *very* comprehensive. And because I have educated parents who were very open and put me on BC at 15 when I got into my first serious relationship, no questions asked. I was very lucky to have those advantages.
KD, I admire your sense of responsibility towards kids. However, I don't think your line of thinking is applicable to the entire population.
Also, I don't care whether you've handwashed laundry before or not -- no way would I want anything to do with a poopy diaper without a washing machine. Nope, nope, nope.
Ooops.. Forgot Wring. See it is difficult. :)
Doesn't apply to the entire population? That the choices we make lead to consequences? Really? Tell it to the mom of a teen slain by a drunk driver.
Marry late? Choice. One of many available.
We do need legit sex ed. We also need to teach PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY to both sexes. And evidently our educational system no longer teaches the basic laws of cause and effect.
-
Cloth diapers requires an initial outlay she may not have
Just for curiosity I googled Walmart cloth diapers. She could buy 20 cloth diapers for less than one pack of disposables. If she used the money she saved doing that to wash them one time she would break even.
First, 20 diapers isn't really enough, even if you have a washer/dryer in your own home. Second, people who are living hand-to-mouth usually don't think long-term like this. Evidence: If this family was thinking ahead, they wouldn't be buying diapers of any type.
I admire her for taking care of the grandchild and buying the diapers.
I don't disagree, but I would admire her more if she'd raised her own children to be a little more responsible. You know, to use birth control, find jobs, provide for their own children.
Whether or not he ends up being a skeezebag that you don't want anywhere near your kid, it's the male point of view which pisses me off completely.
Thing is, all too many people -- mostly the poorest and most vulnerable in our society -- have decided to let men off the hook for the children they create in a moment's passion. The girl writes "unknown" on the birth certificate (I'd die of shame to write that), and she gets welfare while the guy isn't persecuted by DSS. Everyone involved allows this to happen because "everyone does it" and it seems like a victimless crime. But the reality is that the guy is walking away scot free, while the girl is given an 18-year sentence raising the child alone, and the taxpayers are footing the bill.
So, yeah, I agree with you that the male point of view is beyond contemptable.
What I don't understand is why the girls agree to have sex with these guys! I mean, they see their older sisters and friends bearing the burden of one evening's pleasure . . . yet they willingly put themselves into the same situation.
The very fact that you cannot get a good quote shows you how much responsibility is put on women.
Blame Biology. If an unintended pregnancy occurs, no matter what choice she makes, the woman will bear the brunt of the consequences. You can rant and rail about unfairness all day long, but a smart woman will take care of her own body instead of worrying about whose responsibility it should be.
Let's face it; if a man is not careful with casual sex, he could have kids that he never knows about, and never pays a dime for if mom can't track him down.
If a woman is not careful with casual sex, she has to deal with it (one way or another) regardless of if there's a dad in the picture or not.
Which is exactly why we need unrestricted access to abortions.
[/quote]I'd say it's why people who choose to have casual sex should be uber-careful with birth control. And the reasoning doesn't stop with concerns about unintended children.
Ummm, I do. Dip, rinse, scrub, dip, rinse. hang to dry. LOST ART? Wow. How difficult.
It actually is pretty difficult physically -- your hands end up red and raw from the wringing, and it isn't nearly as good as using a washing machine. Keeping up with the quantity of wash necessary for a baby in diapers would take hours every week (yeah, the 21 and 24 year old could do that, but we all know they won't). And that's even if you skip the super-icky poop factor.
We do need legit sex ed. We also need to teach PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY to both sexes. And evidently our educational system no longer teaches the basic laws of cause and effect.
I think kids KNOW what they're supposed to do -- what we need to do is ENFORCE doing the right thing. Of course, that's not exactly our greatest strength as a society.
-
Nope, not excusing Dads either. One or both parents should be working to support the children. Not Grandma.
edited to add: As I said, it's about choices. As a young lady I didn't have sex outside of marriage if I couldn't of afforded the child it would have produced.
Seeing how late a lot of people get married, I don't consider that a very realistic option. But then again, I used 2 forms of BC (sometimes 3!) and of course, you know, there's always legal termination.
See that's why we need legit sex ed.
People think pulling out or using a condom is basically 100% effective. News flash: it ain't. Not by a lot. Even a condom is only like 70% effective in the hands of the population because people don't always use them properly (another argument for sex ed! Bananas, anyone?) Same for BC pills --99.8% effective when used properly under supervision of clinical trial scientists; significantly less effective in the real world.
If you want to have casual sex with impunity, you really need at least a hormonal and a barrier. Soooo many of my peers don't realize this. I realize this because my sex ed class was *very* comprehensive. And because I have educated parents who were very open and put me on BC at 15 when I got into my first serious relationship, no questions asked. I was very lucky to have those advantages.
KD, I admire your sense of responsibility towards kids. However, I don't think your line of thinking is applicable to the entire population.
Also, I don't care whether you've handwashed laundry before or not -- no way would I want anything to do with a poopy diaper without a washing machine. Nope, nope, nope.
Ooops.. Forgot Wring. See it is difficult. :)
Doesn't apply to the entire population? That the choices we make lead to consequences? Really? Tell it to the mom of a teen slain by a drunk driver.
Marry late? Choice. One of many available.
We do need legit sex ed. We also need to teach PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY to both sexes. And evidently our educational system no longer teaches the basic laws of cause and effect.
The problem is that completely unprotected sex!=pregnancy 100% of the time. It's not as straightforward cause and effect as you're implying it is.
So no matter what a teacher or parent tells a kid, they will have friends that have sex irresponsibly and do not get pregnant. These friends might be naturally less fertile than the kid in question, or just got lucky, or happened to be in a non-fertile part of the cycle, or whatever. They don't know the difference; they're going to tell their friends, "no really, Jimmy and I had sex and I never got pregnant, you'll be fine if he just tries to pull out; plus I took a shower right after to clean it out and since I'm not pregnant, that must have worked."
That's seriously the level of misconception that a lot of kids operate under; honestly probably some of their parents operate under the same misconceptions. Fixing that kind of epidemic of ignorance requires a huge amount of effort and understanding and patience, not yelling and screaming about personal responsibility and "keep your legs shut."
-
We do need legit sex ed. We also need to teach PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY to both sexes. And evidently our educational system no longer teaches the basic laws of cause and effect.
(a) There is no such law. Perhaps you are thinking of Newton's third law, but the law is actually majorly misused if/when referred to as some kind of general "cause and effect" law. It's a pain in the ass to unteach, actually.
(b) Having children should not be seen as some unfortunate punishment for a lack of planning and/or unfortunate result of a lack of personal responsibility. People should be free to have whatever sex whenever they'd like, and to have or not have children. An issue with people having unwanted children is a societal one (eg, poor access to birth control, abortion, etc) not a personal one.
-
We do need legit sex ed. We also need to teach PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY to both sexes. And evidently our educational system no longer teaches the basic laws of cause and effect.
(a) There is no such law. Perhaps you are thinking of Newton's third law, but the law is actually majorly misused if/when referred to as some kind of general "cause and effect" law. It's a pain in the ass to unteach, actually.
(b) Having children should not be seen as some unfortunate punishment for a lack of planning and/or unfortunate result of a lack of personal responsibility. People should be free to have whatever sex whenever they'd like, and to have or not have children. An issue with people having unwanted children is a societal one (eg, poor access to birth control, abortion, etc) not a personal one.
Thank you for phrasing this so much more eloquently than I have been! That's the exact point I've been trying to make.
-
But obviously we can teach all the sex ed and have all the legal abortions we want and people will still have ill-planned children. At a certain point there is definitely personal responsibility.
-
I agree with all you are saying there Caliq. Wasn't yelling and screaming it. Also didn't imply that there was a 100% effect of pregnancy. ANYWHERE in this convo that I can recall. Pretty sure I said it equaled a chance of pregnancy.
Teaching that abstinence is an effective way to prevent pregnancy is not taught as often as it should/could be because of course anyone who promotes that is /'Must Be' a religious fanatic. No, it's a viable alternative and you can say NO.
Even if you have an urge. "NO" is a perfectly good way to prevent pregnancy.
YES has consequences. Not 100 percent of the time, as you say, does it lead to pregnancy.
There are reputational consequences at times. Sadly this falls on the girl. Shouldn't be so.
There is often guilt.
There is the chance for an STD.
There is a good chance of a pregnancy.
etc., etc., etc.
Some forms of birth control have hormonal/health consequences for women as well.
I believe the world as we have known it is too puritanical. Sex is wonderful. It has a place (otherwise we wouldn't be here). It also has consequences. Sometimes many kids get involved in it because it is so 'forbidden'.
But, both parties can say NO. Not saying it is/was easy.
Choice? All I'm saying is that Abstinence can be ONE of our choices.
Gonna run - time to feed the troops.
-
(b) Having children should not be seen as some unfortunate punishment for a lack of planning and/or unfortunate result of a lack of personal responsibility. People should be free to have whatever sex whenever they'd like, and to have or not have children. An issue with people having unwanted children is a societal one (eg, poor access to birth control, abortion, etc) not a personal one.
Thank you for phrasing this so much more eloquently than I have been! That's the exact point I've been trying to make.
Emilyngh: Agree with caliq. Very well put.
But obviously we can teach all the sex ed and have all the legal abortions we want and people will still have ill-planned children. At a certain point there is definitely personal responsibility.
sheepstache: I disagree. I would think that the number of ill-planned children would decrease significantly .
-
"Don't buy diapers. Buy condoms."
Thats my life advice. It has worked pretty well for me.
-
The problem is that completely unprotected sex!=pregnancy 100% of the time. It's not as straightforward cause and effect as you're implying it is.
So no matter what a teacher or parent tells a kid, they will have friends that have sex irresponsibly and do not get pregnant. These friends might be naturally less fertile than the kid in question, or just got lucky, or happened to be in a non-fertile part of the cycle, or whatever. They don't know the difference; they're going to tell their friends, "no really, Jimmy and I had sex and I never got pregnant, you'll be fine if he just tries to pull out; plus I took a shower right after to clean it out and since I'm not pregnant, that must have worked."
That's seriously the level of misconception that a lot of kids operate under; honestly probably some of their parents operate under the same misconceptions. Fixing that kind of epidemic of ignorance requires a huge amount of effort and understanding and patience, not yelling and screaming about personal responsibility and "keep your legs shut."
I agree that this is ONE of the problems that lead to unwanted pregnancies.
Some teens begin with the idea that adults are always just trying to ruin their fun, so when the best friend has sex (using the pull out method or whatever else) and NO BABY APPEARS . . . well, that overrides every lecture every health teacher ever gave. Stupid adults, always trying to keep the good stuff to themselves. Probably lying about those STDs too.
These are the same kids who say, "I make better grades when I don't study" (couldn't have been that one test was just easy). And they turn into the same adults who claim, "I drive better when I'm drunk".
-
Driving drunk isn't 100% cause and effect. Sometimes you can drive drunk and not have an accident. Doesn't mean we absolve people of responsibility if they cause an accident.
Don't get me wrong, I think that sex ed and access to abortion play a huge role and I have liberal attitudes towards both. But I'm not one of the sex-is-a-human right folks. If you don't have the money for an abortion or if you morally wouldn't have one and you don't want kids, then don't have sex. Let's be real, plenty of people know they might have a kid and still do it for the same reason they take on credit card debt. Feels good, don't care about the consequences, or engage in wishful thinking about how easy the consequences will be to handle.
-
The problem is that completely unprotected sex!=pregnancy 100% of the time. It's not as straightforward cause and effect as you're implying it is.
So no matter what a teacher or parent tells a kid, they will have friends that have sex irresponsibly and do not get pregnant. These friends might be naturally less fertile than the kid in question, or just got lucky, or happened to be in a non-fertile part of the cycle, or whatever. They don't know the difference; they're going to tell their friends, "no really, Jimmy and I had sex and I never got pregnant, you'll be fine if he just tries to pull out; plus I took a shower right after to clean it out and since I'm not pregnant, that must have worked."
That's seriously the level of misconception that a lot of kids operate under; honestly probably some of their parents operate under the same misconceptions. Fixing that kind of epidemic of ignorance requires a huge amount of effort and understanding and patience, not yelling and screaming about personal responsibility and "keep your legs shut."
I agree that this is ONE of the problems that lead to unwanted pregnancies.
Some teens begin with the idea that adults are always just trying to ruin their fun, so when the best friend has sex (using the pull out method or whatever else) and NO BABY APPEARS . . . well, that overrides every lecture every health teacher ever gave. Stupid adults, always trying to keep the good stuff to themselves. Probably lying about those STDs too.
These are the same kids who say, "I make better grades when I don't study" (couldn't have been that one test was just easy). And they turn into the same adults who claim, "I drive better when I'm drunk".
Not all of them -- I was one of those kids and I don't drive drunk (nor did I ever have unprotected sex; just didn't study!).
My point is that kids do and say stupid things all the time, and the vast majority of them grow up to be fairly reasonable, functional adults. If the number of stupid teenagers equaled the number of stupid adults, I would be afraid for the continued existence of civilization.
Since we know teenagers have irrational thought processes (because their brains are literally not fully developed), why would we not make it as easy as possible to acquire proper protection?
The opportunity cost of not having sex at all vs. the opportunity cost of going on the pill and/or using a condom are two very different things. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect, as a society, that teenagers and young adults (and older adults tbh) will not always act in their rational best interest. Therefore, we should make safe sex as much of a no-brainer as possible, by making protection (and termination) readily available.
-
The problem is that completely unprotected sex!=pregnancy 100% of the time. It's not as straightforward cause and effect as you're implying it is.
So no matter what a teacher or parent tells a kid, they will have friends that have sex irresponsibly and do not get pregnant. These friends might be naturally less fertile than the kid in question, or just got lucky, or happened to be in a non-fertile part of the cycle, or whatever. They don't know the difference; they're going to tell their friends, "no really, Jimmy and I had sex and I never got pregnant, you'll be fine if he just tries to pull out; plus I took a shower right after to clean it out and since I'm not pregnant, that must have worked."
That's seriously the level of misconception that a lot of kids operate under; honestly probably some of their parents operate under the same misconceptions. Fixing that kind of epidemic of ignorance requires a huge amount of effort and understanding and patience, not yelling and screaming about personal responsibility and "keep your legs shut."
I agree that this is ONE of the problems that lead to unwanted pregnancies.
Some teens begin with the idea that adults are always just trying to ruin their fun, so when the best friend has sex (using the pull out method or whatever else) and NO BABY APPEARS . . . well, that overrides every lecture every health teacher ever gave. Stupid adults, always trying to keep the good stuff to themselves. Probably lying about those STDs too.
These are the same kids who say, "I make better grades when I don't study" (couldn't have been that one test was just easy). And they turn into the same adults who claim, "I drive better when I'm drunk".
Not all of them -- I was one of those kids and I don't drive drunk (nor did I ever have unprotected sex; just didn't study!).
My point is that kids do and say stupid things all the time, and the vast majority of them grow up to be fairly reasonable, functional adults. If the number of stupid teenagers equaled the number of stupid adults, I would be afraid for the continued existence of civilization.
Since we know teenagers have irrational thought processes (because their brains are literally not fully developed), why would we not make it as easy as possible to acquire proper protection?
The opportunity cost of not having sex at all vs. the opportunity cost of going on the pill and/or using a condom are two very different things. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect, as a society, that teenagers and young adults (and older adults tbh) will not always act in their rational best interest. Therefore, we should make safe sex as much of a no-brainer as possible, by making protection (and termination) readily available.
I agree. It's why I am the go-to teacher for handing out condoms without judgment. All of my students know that if they are ever in need, they can stop by my house and my son will hand them out.
I have kept condoms in the house for my own children and their friends since they started high school.
They are now 16 and 18 and no pregnancies yet. I'll get back to you in a few years to see how this turns out. ;)
-
What I don't understand is why the girls agree to have sex with these guys! I mean, they see their older sisters and friends bearing the burden of one evening's pleasure . . . yet they willingly put themselves into the same situation.
"Poverty is bleak and cuts off your long-term brain. It's why you see people with four different babydaddies instead of one. You grab a bit of connection wherever you can to survive. You have no idea how strong the pull to feel worthwhile is. It's more basic than food. You go to these people who make you feel lovely for an hour that one time, and that's all you get. You're probably not compatible with them for anything long-term, but right this minute they can make you feel powerful and valuable. It does not matter what will happen in a month. Whatever happens in a month is probably going to be just about as indifferent as whatever happened today or last week. None of it matters. We don't plan long-term because if we do we'll just get our hearts broken. It's best not to hope. You just take what you can get as you spot it." Linda Tirado, from her essay "Why I Make Terrible Decisions"
Having lived in extreme poverty, I totally get that sentiment, although thankfully my poor decisions didn't result in a kid. It's damn hard to be poor like that, but for a lot of people it's all they've ever known. How can one make good decisions if they've never been taught to do so?
-
What I don't understand is why the girls agree to have sex with these guys! I mean, they see their older sisters and friends bearing the burden of one evening's pleasure . . . yet they willingly put themselves into the same situation.
"Poverty is bleak and cuts off your long-term brain. It's why you see people with four different babydaddies instead of one. You grab a bit of connection wherever you can to survive. You have no idea how strong the pull to feel worthwhile is. It's more basic than food. You go to these people who make you feel lovely for an hour that one time, and that's all you get. You're probably not compatible with them for anything long-term, but right this minute they can make you feel powerful and valuable. It does not matter what will happen in a month. Whatever happens in a month is probably going to be just about as indifferent as whatever happened today or last week. None of it matters. We don't plan long-term because if we do we'll just get our hearts broken. It's best not to hope. You just take what you can get as you spot it." Linda Tirado, from her essay "Why I Make Terrible Decisions"
Having lived in extreme poverty, I totally get that sentiment, although thankfully my poor decisions didn't result in a kid. It's damn hard to be poor like that, but for a lot of people it's all they've ever known. How can one make good decisions if they've never been taught to do so?
sorry...don't buy it
sounds like excuses.
They aren't living in extreme poverty. They have food, shelter, job,clothes, vehicle, etc...
-
People have the urge to throttle, stab, murder someone.
People have the urge to have sex w/minor children.
People have the urge to rape.
This didn't make anyone else laugh?
Life is so tough, all these urges of murder, rape, molestation and .................consensual sex.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-K3VlA58T2I8/UoDmb09hl6I/AAAAAAAABxA/Pctgap8z2zI/s1600/Not+like+the+other.png)
+1000
That's exactly why I find the 'consequences...' line of argument re unwanted pregnancies so creepy to begin with. Without explicitly saying so it has an undercurrent of 'sex is dirty, evil and bad (and only through marriage magically changes into something good)' and sort of equates a new human being with a much deserved prison sentence. Would anyone volunteer to be parented because 'consequences, you slut!'?
Countries with proper sex ed have lower teen pregnancy rates for a reason. And speaking for my country, the remaining cases are no real accidents most of the time but the result of a wish to have a baby early because of other problems. This problem can of course not be solved by any amount of sex ed.
-
I wonder why her two children (in their 20's) don't have jobs. Are they unable to work due to disability? All I saw in the article was that they are unable to find work. Them having jobs, even minimum wage jobs, would really help the entire family out. Even one of them working while the other watches the children.
-
TLDR; Grandma is living in poverty because she never got valuable skills worth more than minimum wage, had 2 kids, and floated between minimum wage jobs. At one point she was advancing out of poverty when an employer gave her a job that paid over 50% more than minimum wage, and the opportunity was squandered by trying to steal five-figures from the employer and going to jail. Grandma's current poverty is made worse because she allows herself to be a doormat and support her 2 adult children living with her who choose not to work or contribute to the house and who expect grandma to fully financially support & parent themselves and their own current kid and (at least) one more on the way.
Sorry if it sounds harsh, but lots of poor choices, squandered opportunities, and continued martyrdom. I'll fully admit I've never been in her shoes...I try to live a life that keeps mine outside of a 6x6 cell surrounded by barbed wire & guards, and had she done the same she may be in a position of actually being worth $12/hr to an employer instead of expecting politicians to set that as the minimum an employer can pay while bemoaning the fact that nobody will hire her for more than the most basic & minimum of jobs (because, you know, if she were promoted into a position with more responsibility like front desk of the hotel she works at processing customer payments she might try to rob them too).
Also would like to call attention to the irony of the article claiming her 2 kids "haven't been able to find work" while simultaneously claiming the recent minimum wage hike had no impact on decreased minimum wage jobs...sure...either they aren't able to find looking for work or their work ethic/skills/criminal risk makes them worth less than minimum wage and could find employment at a rate below that if an employer were legally allowed to pay it.
-
As Mustachians we should probably ignore these types of stories completely. It's the whole "life just happened to me," mentality. They have no choices, no hope for improvement, no desire to change themselves or their thinking to get ahead, no personal responsibility, it's society's fault, the economy's fault, the immigrants' fault, the greedy banks' fault, the minimum wage's fault, there's nothing I can do to make things better, life happened and I had nothing to do with it, etc, etc.
We're all better than that. We can pull up our bootstraps, learn something new if we need to, work actively on improving our own lives, our careers, build things, work hard, study, move if need be, teach proper moral values to our children... You know? We focus on the good qualities of self-empowerment. Leave the sad sacks and dead weight behind us.
-
As Mustachians we should probably ignore these types of stories completely. It's the whole "life just happened to me," mentality. They have no choices, no hope for improvement, no desire to change themselves or their thinking to get ahead, no personal responsibility, it's society's fault, the economy's fault, the immigrants' fault, the greedy banks' fault, the minimum wage's fault, there's nothing I can do to make things better, life happened and I had nothing to do with it, etc, etc.
We're all better than that. We can pull up our bootstraps, learn something new if we need to, work actively on improving our own lives, our careers, build things, work hard, study, move if need be, teach proper moral values to our children... You know? We focus on the good qualities of self-empowerment. Leave the sad sacks and dead weight behind us.
But...but I come here for the judgment.
I tried going to People of Walmart. It's just not the same.
-
"her family is about to grow — another grandchild who will live with her. The baby girl is expected sometime this month. Tippen will be buying the diapers."
Why the fuck will another child be living with her and she be "buying the diapers"? OK, neither of my grandmas ever bought me diapers, my mom never bought my nieces and nephews diapers, and I know of no longstanding tradition anywhere where it's up to gammy to be buying nappies. The fact that your nan didn't buy you diapers and support you doesn't mean you're affluent. This isn't a sad tale of poverty, this sound like wretched people making more people to live in wretchedness with them. What are all the parents of these kids doing? No income? Just laying around having sex and passing them off to their moms? Well, their own jailbird mom obviously didn't do a great job in raising them either. Cripes, what's the point in keeping a child if you can't provide properly and pass them off to someone else anyway. Adoption used to actually be a thing. Usually a very good thing for the child's future. ...Anyway.
Best case safety --> Mom, dad, grandma, and grandpa.
Worst case safety net --> Just grandma.
Why is the latter suddenly an A-OK thing to do and it's normal and nobody ever questions or says, "Yo, WTF?"? Where are the men for gods sakes?!!
My grandmother was in an orphanage in the US, it was not a good thing and there are many, many children who will never be adopted and like my grandmother will age out of the system with less support than this family is giving each other.
-
Nope, not excusing Dads either. One or both parents should be working to support the children. Not Grandma.
edited to add: As I said, it's about choices. As a young lady I didn't have sex outside of marriage if I couldn't of afforded the child it would have produced.
Seeing how late a lot of people get married, I don't consider that a very realistic option. But then again, I used 2 forms of BC (sometimes 3!) and of course, you know, there's always legal termination.
Do you seriously think that? At her income level? Given the state of the majority of state legislation? Yea right, if she got pregnant the likelihood would be, no available abortion.
-
Wow - I wonder if the person who wrote this article had another agenda. Open with a story on the minimum wage and how it is hard for a grandmother to support herself and her child. As you start to empathize with her the author then sets out on a character assassination to the point that the original issue with people been forced to live on very low wages while the corporate's concentrate on share prices is conveniently forgotten.
Again the problem is with those welfare scroungers breeding like rabbits and stealing from their employers. I was surprised by the comments section on this forum however, flicking through the arguments centered around condoms/urges/criminals/choices/consequences, no mention of greed/compassion/fairness. I have said it recently this forum is getting hijacked by people who have no fucking idea how fortunate they are and take pleasure in bashing those they consider below them.
Head over to Fox NEWS FFS.
-
But...but I come here for the judgment.
I tried going to People of Walmart. It's just not the same.
Hahaha..... Yep! I haven't visited that site in years. It's so irksome! And far too much like actually visiting a Walmart. You always leave feeling dirty. ...But without two handfuls carrying those shitty grey shopping bags which instantly get holes in the bottom so you can never reuse them for anything else.
-
At Burger King, employee Colby McIntyre — a sweaty 37-year-old grilling burgers next to a heat lamp
Umm, YUM.
Nothing like sweat drippins special sauce to really flavor up that Whopper.
-
I didn't read the article. Just some of the comments. I expect it came down to personal choices.....and, the wrong ones. I doubt I would feel sorry for her.
-
That woman from the article is so stupid. She deserves what she gets. After all, all our our lives are really easy, so her life must be really easy too. Why didn't she just live with her wealthy relatives for a year or so until she could build her nest egg? They probably could have put her up in their pool house. Then, she could have used her connections from the Ivy League education her parents paid for, so she could get a high-paying job pushing papers around and going to power lunches at expensive restaurants with the company AMEX. It's all so simple.