|
Post by lark descending on Feb 27, 2010 12:21:36 GMT
Do you know what benefit levels are, James? Not inticingly high. With no slack for emergencies (shoes, for eg, or school trips). When the Daily Mail give out what a single mother gets, it will include the rent, which she doesn't get but which goes straight to the landlord or council. If girls get the idea that benefits are very high, it will be from Mail reports and the like, not a look through DWP leaflets. Sexualised girls are always other people's children. None the less Aubrey, the income for a single parent on benefits isn't much lower than if she works full time on a low wage - indeed once you take childcare and travel costs into account the difference can be non-existent, even taking tax credits into account. The gap is much wider for a single person, who definitely gets less onbasic benefits.
|
|
|
Post by jamesjosh on Feb 27, 2010 13:08:29 GMT
An example of unfeckless behaviour
I have just been in the coffee shop and there was a young man (mid-twenties) with a very young baby who was feeding (with a bottle before you ask), completely at home coping with his child.
The downside was that as he bent over he showed a bit too much of his rear end, if you know what I mean,
He then began to walk round the coffee shop with his baby. I know he was being a proud father but he did come over as a bit of a show off - you felt like saying so you are looking after a baby, get over yourself.
(Or are you just a bit jealous because you are not a father - interesting)
|
|
aubrey
WH Member
Seeker for Truth and Penitence
Posts: 665
|
Post by aubrey on Feb 27, 2010 17:50:11 GMT
I know - which is why the idea that work is the way out of poverty is so dispiriting. The Govt seems happy to talk about people on benefits who are having a bad time, but not about people who are working - as if work automatically leads to a massive increase in income - this is their only remedy for poverty.
(I mean - jobs, rather than a career. Work that does not lead to automatic promotion, but stays at the bottom. Important work as well - looking after children, old people - all minimum wage work. Probably we don'ty really think work like that is all that important, though.)
|
|
pippa
WH Member
Posts: 230
|
Post by pippa on Feb 27, 2010 18:36:25 GMT
too right, it's a poverty trap.
|
|
|
Post by lark descending on Feb 27, 2010 19:40:39 GMT
I know - which is why the idea that work is the way out of poverty is so dispiriting. The Govt seems happy to talk about people on benefits who are having a bad time, but not about people who are working - as if work automatically leads to a massive increase in income - this is their only remedy for poverty. (I mean - jobs, rather than a career. Work that does not lead to automatic promotion, but stays at the bottom. Important work as well - looking after children, old people - all minimum wage work. Probably we don'ty really think work like that is all that important, though.) I used to think that someone just entering the job market would start out on the minimum wage, then move to a higher wage position once she had a year or two under her belt. This can of course happen - but I suspect the chances of staying on the minimum wage are pretty high. A parent on income support can earn a small amount (£20 a week from memory) without her benefit being affected....I'm not suprised that it seems an atractive alternative to work. But are we really talking about women who have sex with a men to get pregnant, ditches them, goes on benefits (which means he will have to pay shcild support ) - then accuses him of being feckless
|
|
|
Post by sweetjessicajane on Feb 28, 2010 8:24:24 GMT
I used to think that someone just entering the job market would start out on the minimum wage, then move to a higher wage position once she had a year or two under her belt. This can of course happen - but I suspect the chances of staying on the minimum wage are pretty high. Of course I am talking about many moons ago, but when I left school I went into a low paid job, as I didn't have a baby and lived at home I could do that. I then spent a number of years improving my qualifications and my experience and so increased my pay. Some of these women leave school with few qualifications but with a baby to care for, so when looking for work they are limited to what they can do because of their lack of qualifications, but require higher pay to cover childcare costs so have difficulty finding work.
|
|
|
Post by jamesjosh on Feb 28, 2010 13:21:04 GMT
But are we really talking about women who have sex with a men to get pregnant, ditches them, goes on benefits (which means he will have to pay shcild support ) - then accuses him of being feckless
I thought we were because I thought Jade was supporting that lifestyle. If I was a woman I would be more concerned about the feckless and damaging behaviour of girls/women than of men especially that behaviour tends to endorse the male society which many women say they find objectionable. Maybe it is a case of if you cannot beat them join them, which seems the attitude of many women today.
Still it makes a change to talking about the weather.
|
|
|
Post by Jade on Mar 1, 2010 9:27:40 GMT
Morning poseters
jamesjosh I was celebrating a society that allows a woman the choice of not having to be a partner with a bloke that she doesn't want.
and it was a little poke at blokes. I think it is great that if a woman wants to become a family without a bloke she is able to do so.
It is a further step away from the prison like structures of hte fifties, which is again a good thing
|
|
|
Post by sweetjessicajane on Mar 1, 2010 15:39:00 GMT
Jade Morning poseters jamesjosh I was celebrating a society that allows a woman the choice of not having to be a partner with a bloke that she doesn't want. and it was a little poke at blokes. I think it is great that if a woman wants to become a family without a bloke she is able to do so. It is a further step away from the prison like structures of hte fifties, which is again a good thing But should the tax payer pick up the bill for her choice?
|
|
|
Post by jamesjosh on Mar 1, 2010 15:58:45 GMT
jamesjosh I was celebrating a society that allows a woman the choice of not having to be a partner with a bloke that she doesn't want
So why do women sleep with men they do not want in their lives ?
Women in the fifties were not forced to get married or have children. My mother was 36 when she got married and it was her choice.
Wasn't it often women who would say to a man "you got me pregnant, you must marry me"
Surely it is the feckless man who has won, in today's society he doesn't have to marry a woman because she was preganant.
And aren't there many women who verbally attack girls who get pregnant and live off the state.
And haven't you learned that making misandrist comments backfire on to women, because women have complained about the misoygnists comments made by men.
And my point remains - if you received state benefits, you are not independent. If women want to have babies without men why should men pay for the upkeep of the child ?
I do find it interesting that you have highlighted this survey but have ignored the other recent survey which indicated that more women than men, think women have themselves to blame for rape.
|
|
|
Post by Jade on Mar 1, 2010 16:10:47 GMT
good heavens jamesjosh I cant read absolutely everything! If you want to start a rape thread do so.
I don't have too much of a problem with people choosing a life paid for by the taxpayer, I think it is a good thing that we don't starve our poor or let them roam homeless.
Its a bloody awful life choice, hardly likely to attract a lot of people. If that is the height of their ambition then I am sorry for them indeed. What aort of poor life must you have that this existence becomes your life's dream?
Yes the feckless man is rewarded for being feckless, but would you rather that he was forced into a marriage? He does have to pay for the child (if he is named and found) and lets face it the feckless lads not wanted by the women highlighted by this story are not going to make a good catch are they?
Yes JJ - there are plenty of women who deride other women for all sorts of things. There always have been and there always will be. It is in the nature of humans to criticise.
and as for your
And haven't you learned that making misandrist comments backfire on to men, because women have complained about the misoygnists comments made by men.
I am not sure what you mean here.
I am noticing that some women prefer not to have the feckless lad in their life that fathered their child. I am celebrating that they can do so. What is misandrist about that?
|
|
|
Post by jamesjosh on Mar 1, 2010 16:18:56 GMT
Where are the older men making sure that todays lads stay on the straight and narrow? We women can only do so much with the boys we produce, men have to take their share of the blame. Their male role models (and don't even think of blaming us for them!) are glamorous and libidinous louts who respect nothing, value nothing outside of their own hedonism and whose moral compass went south a long time ago.
= misandrist.
Women criticise men for making, sexist comments then do the same, thereby losing credibility. Treat people how you want to be treated.
|
|
|
Post by Jade on Mar 1, 2010 16:29:28 GMT
not misandrist at all!
It criticises the current crop of male role models and asks where are the older men that could take a hand in shaping the younfg men of today
nothing man-hating at all
Do read me more carefully, FBs
|
|
|
Post by jamesjosh on Mar 1, 2010 16:43:21 GMT
not misandrist at all! It criticises the current crop of male role models and asks where are the older men that could take a hand in shaping the younfg men of today nothing man-hating at all Do read me more carefully, FBs Okay Jade. I think I bring "misandrist" into this type of debate because of the way "misoygny" is introduced so readily into other gender debates.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 2, 2010 0:15:31 GMT
And is this an option you will be encouraging your own daughter to choose, Jade, to make the state into her baby's "father", to get herself a home at the tax-payer's expense (to which Aubrey apparently also believes she is entitled)? Or is that just an option for the underclass - to CHOOSE to live off their fellow citizens?
Have you heard about the upcoming public expenditure cuts, jade? Don't you think that your little volunteer baby-mummy clients of the welfare state will be feeling the pinch soon? Isn't your vision of this female pseudo-emancipation going to be challenged by increasing state financial stringency?
Maybe they'll have to go back to live with THEIR mums. That's what "families" are for, isn't it? Mutual support?
|
|