Shouldn't the workforce be updated to better accommodate women?

[Scarlett]

I always see modern feminists complaining and asking for the dumbest things. I rarely see them mentioning things that are related to work and careers. I think there needs to be something updated dealing with pregnancy and women choosing to start their careers later. Women are often forced to pick either having children or having a career because of a biological clock. If it was more acceptable for women to start their careers in their mid-to late 30's and businesses would hire them, this would allow women to have children younger (when they are more likely to be healthy) instead of struggling to get pregnant later in life, if at all. Pregnancy leave needs to be extended in the US as well. Many other countries give 6 months to an entire year off without worry their will lose their job but in the US, many places are offering 6 weeks to a max of 3 months. That is not okay. 

Thoughts?

[James]

As an employer I am grateful to not live in a country like Canada where they get a year off. 

Everything is a choice and if you choose to have kids I think it is important for the family unit to have a parent at home to take care of those children through the earlier years of life. I do not think this hurts career as the lady chose to have children instead of focusing on building a career. 

We have 4 kids (16, 13, 11, and 4). The first two I was working two full time jobs and my wife was working 1. When kid 3 came along day care was now more expensive then my wives checks so it made financial sense for her to stay home. She has loved every minute of it. If we needed more cash I would just go out and hustle a little harder. 

I think the 3 months is long enough and it a fair amount of time for an employer to hold a job. It is a struggle for the business to it's not like processes just stop. 

There has to be a happy middle ground here. I think women can still have children early if they so want to. The argument that career is stopping that from happening does not seem proper since it is a choice to focus on career instead of family. We can not have it all. 

 

[Stacey]

I think society needs to stop spoon feeding women lies. You can't have the career, the husband, and the kids. One will always suffer of those three. I think women should be encouraged to have children younger and focus on their careers later when their kids are older and in school. It makes the most sense to me. Telling women they need to go to college right after high school, sleep around, live it up, and settle down in their 30's is a joke. Women who marry in their 30's struggle to have kids, if even they find someone to marry. Men who want kids don't want to marry someone who has a high probability of never being able to have them. I agree with James as well... The businesses that allow long maternity leave have to hire someone to replace the woman who is out for a year. Who is going to get hired knowing they will get fired in a year? Most people won't accept that. 

[Ella]

Having more pregnancy leave sounds amazing for women and while I wish it was as simple as just allowing it, this would end up causing a very impactful disturbance in the workforce across the board. If it was the standard, 1 year off for pregnancy, that would be an entire 12 months the company will have to cover the costs of someone not working while paying for a temp replacement. A lot of smaller businesses will be hurt severely by this. I think if companies like Walmart or Amazon want to offer it, go right ahead but don't punish smaller companies. 

If you want a career as a woman and not just a job, then you have to be willing to make sacrifices or choose to have children earlier in life. It sucks that we can't be like the guys, but at the same time we have plenty of benefits they will never have access to either. 

[Mila]

On 7/14/2021 at 8:00 PM, Scarlett said:

I always see modern feminists complaining and asking for the dumbest things. I rarely see them mentioning things that are related to work and careers. I think there needs to be something updated dealing with pregnancy and women choosing to start their careers later. Women are often forced to pick either having children or having a career because of a biological clock. If it was more acceptable for women to start their careers in their mid-to late 30's and businesses would hire them, this would allow women to have children younger (when they are more likely to be healthy) instead of struggling to get pregnant later in life, if at all. Pregnancy leave needs to be extended in the US as well. Many other countries give 6 months to an entire year off without worry their will lose their job but in the US, many places are offering 6 weeks to a max of 3 months. That is not okay. 

Thoughts?

A few years ago, I would have agreed with everything you said and then some. It just isn't that simple. Even raising minimum wage is going to do a lot of businesses in. I don't like that women have to choose one or the other and I do agree that places should be more willing to hire older women because they chose to have their children first. It seems to be the biologically smart thing to do... But we can't punish companies if women decide to have kids in the middle of a career. Plenty of women make it work just fine. I don't know what solutions need to be made but I know that giving women more time off for pregnancy won't help anyone in the long run. 

[Scarlett]

On 7/15/2021 at 4:02 PM, James said:

As an employer I am grateful to not live in a country like Canada where they get a year off. 

Everything is a choice and if you choose to have kids I think it is important for the family unit to have a parent at home to take care of those children through the earlier years of life. I do not think this hurts career as the lady chose to have children instead of focusing on building a career. 

We have 4 kids (16, 13, 11, and 4). The first two I was working two full time jobs and my wife was working 1. When kid 3 came along day care was now more expensive then my wives checks so it made financial sense for her to stay home. She has loved every minute of it. If we needed more cash I would just go out and hustle a little harder. 

I think the 3 months is long enough and it a fair amount of time for an employer to hold a job. It is a struggle for the business to it's not like processes just stop. 

There has to be a happy middle ground here. I think women can still have children early if they so want to. The argument that career is stopping that from happening does not seem proper since it is a choice to focus on career instead of family. We can not have it all. 

 

I understand this. And like others have mentioned, you can't have a family life and a career life at the same time as a woman but men can? I feel like they push woman into being in careers from young adulthood, putting off having families and marriage only to pull the rug out from under them. They encourage this while encouraging men to do the same but men can produce healthy children well into their 50's, women don't have that luxury. So why aren't they encouraging men to take up the parental role as the house husband? I don't ever see people suggest this. Everyone seems to think women should be able to be the wife, the career woman, and the mother and like you and others mentioned, you can't have it all. 

It makes me mad because everything being encouraged right now for women (and to a lesser extent men), it all doesn't make sense unless they want people having less children. If that is the goal, it is working because I read people are having such fewer babies today, it will impact the country big time in another 30 years. 

[James]

On 7/18/2021 at 7:31 AM, Scarlett said:

I understand this. And like others have mentioned, you can't have a family life and a career life at the same time as a woman but men can? I feel like they push woman into being in careers from young adulthood, putting off having families and marriage only to pull the rug out from under them. They encourage this while encouraging men to do the same but men can produce healthy children well into their 50's, women don't have that luxury. So why aren't they encouraging men to take up the parental role as the house husband? I don't ever see people suggest this. Everyone seems to think women should be able to be the wife, the career woman, and the mother and like you and others mentioned, you can't have it all. 

It makes me mad because everything being encouraged right now for women (and to a lesser extent men), it all doesn't make sense unless they want people having less children. If that is the goal, it is working because I read people are having such fewer babies today, it will impact the country big time in another 30 years. 

I would have had no problem being the stay at home parent. It made more sense for us though for me to continue to work and for the wife to stop just because my jobs paid more then her jobs. If the situation were the other way around I would have been the one to stay at home and get it done. 

Men can be the ones to raise family. I do strongly feel that when the children are young (under 12) it is important to have the support and supervision of one of the parents at all times. 

There are also ways both parents can work and someone is always at home awake with the kids. It is called shift work and as someone who has worked a ton of graveyard hours (10pm - 6am ect) my wife and I were always able to find a way to make this work. 

I also do feel like Dads are becoming more involved over time. I know Dads younger then me that are way more involved then I have ever been and take on way more responsibility. Likely because both people in their households have full time jobs. 

The people pushing career first have to be coming from the corporate world where they are trying to raise a mindless society that is a slave to the corporation. 

Career does not need to be the highest priority. Some people choose to live places where it is so expensive they have to work all those hours just to keep a roof over their heads but that is a choice.

Family needs to go back to being the top priority in people's lives. It should be about raising great children. The family being the most important thing well before career. 

I have had to choose work over family a couple times in my life but I feel I was able to do that because my wife is strong and we make a great team. 

Corporate America wants the workers all to themselves and do not like sharing with the family. It would be great if people would stop supporting these companies but they want their cheap plastic from china more then they want to have a family meal. 

I dont know when I put on my manager hat I think of things through the lens of the company and that of course is all about driving a company forward. The employees personal decisions outside of work should not impact the company. It is not fair to make another party suffer for choices that are being made. 

I think the problem is it's getting to cost so much to live that both parents have to work. It would be nice if one parent could work a good 50 - 60 hours a week and the other one focuses on the family unit and as a team they are able to make it through. 

[Scarlett]

On 7/19/2021 at 4:04 PM, James said:

I think the problem is it's getting to cost so much to live that both parents have to work. It would be nice if one parent could work a good 50 - 60 hours a week and the other one focuses on the family unit and as a team they are able to make it through. 

This is how it once was though and I would really like to know what went wrong here! These days, you have to be earning like 80k+ a year to support a spouse and children and even then, you might end up scraping by or struggling if you have debt. I feel like the only people who get to choose are those making 6 figure incomes. 

[James]

On 7/25/2021 at 3:08 PM, Scarlett said:

This is how it once was though and I would really like to know what went wrong here! These days, you have to be earning like 80k+ a year to support a spouse and children and even then, you might end up scraping by or struggling if you have debt. I feel like the only people who get to choose are those making 6 figure incomes. 

Having to make this much is true if you live in some of the most desirable places to live like the coasts. It is becoming the same way here where I am in Phoenix. Things are getting pricier. 

If you are able to figure out how to work for yourself though and make sure that what you are doing is not location dependent you can move to parts of the United States where it would be possible to make 60k a year and still get by just fine. Yes the jobs in those areas do not pay as much but self employment is as good or bad as you want it to be. 

[Stacey]

Becoming an entrepreneur, especially one that functions online, is like the best bet right now. I know of self-made millionaires in their late 20's who managed websites. You can learn this stuff yourself. I mean being able to have a stay at home career is ideal for most families. You will never lose focus of family. They won't let you!

[Scarlett]

So in an ideal world, women should focus more on being entrepreneurs if they want to have the career and family life. I guess that makes sense. It is a shame that there is not more of a push for this. Being a stay at home career mom. I can't say I know many of those but I would imagine they are some of the happiest women. 

[James]

On 8/2/2021 at 11:38 AM, Scarlett said:

So in an ideal world, women should focus more on being entrepreneurs if they want to have the career and family life. I guess that makes sense. It is a shame that there is not more of a push for this. Being a stay at home career mom. I can't say I know many of those but I would imagine they are some of the happiest women. 

Wish my wife would sign up here and help me grow my community. She is super happy and loves being a stay at home mom. She thanks me for the opportunity all the time and for asking her to give up her full time job once kid number 3 came along. Every now and then she will pick up a little side hustle but her top priority is always the kids. That is what she lives for. So she is getting to live her dream. 

There is something to be said about kids that have a parent dedicated to them. The family unit has been destroyed over the years and is leading to a lot of the problems we are seeing in society today. Having a great career is typically motivated by financial reasons and finance should not be the most important thing to us. 

People should take step backwards and ask themselves why the wealthy seem so unhappy all the time...

[Stacey]

I agree with James, the focus and need for both parents to work is severely hurting society on more than one level. There is nothing wrong with wanting to be a mother and a career woman but you need to be able to find a man who will support your choice and be the primary caretaker at home. One parent needs to be. I know some people rely on grandparents for this but they are older and often not in touch with a lot of things so older kids can easily pull a fast one on them or take advantage of their kindness. 

Children need to feel loved and supported at home, if they don't they will take that lacking in their minds and hearts and fill it with stuff that can hurt them or others like drugs, sleeping around (think STDs), stealing, joining gangs, and so on.

[Scarlett]

On 8/3/2021 at 6:43 PM, James said:

People should take step backwards and ask themselves why the wealthy seem so unhappy all the time...

You know... I do find myself thinking about this more and more. While a lot of wealthy people are happy, it is temporary and they almost always seem to have relationship and friendship issues. I guess that old saying "more money more problems" holds true for most people.