Post: #1

Official 'well-being' index shows those who do not work because they are caring for children or loved-ones have strongest belief that their life is 'worthwhile'

Mothers who have put their career aside to care for their children have a stronger sense that their lives are “worthwhile” than the rest of society, official figures suggest.

Laura Perrin, a barrister turned full-time mother who campaigns from the group Mothers At Home Matter said the figures showed that government policies designed to encourage more parents to work full time could be doing more harm than good.

“This just goes to show that the idea that we are all at home depressed and unhappy looking after our own children – which a lot of politicians would like to believe – is simply wrong,” she said.

“It is clearly a worthwhile vocation, should you choose to do it.”

The group campaigns for greater recognition of marriage and traditional family life in the tax system. It argues that the Coalition’s childcare tax breaks for couples in which both parents work, penalises families in which one parent has given up work to care for the children.

“David Cameron has set his face against the more traditional set-up with a mother at home caring for her children but his own figures show that not only are they happy but they recognise their lives are worthwhile," she said.

New findings from the UK’s national “well-being” index show that those classed as economically inactive because they are caring for a family or home are also among the happiest people in Britain.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-...lives.html

Post: #2

Men's ideal rationale, work hard enough so women could stay at home and be their happiest.

Women's ideal rationale, in response to men gifting you the chance to fluff around at home your whole life, invent feminism and make men, women and children unhappy.

This same decision making process is at work when they vote

Post: #3

I've noticed the the hottest chicks don't really have to work. There's a slim chance that you'll see a dime working at Starbucks. Looking back on it feminism was invented by ugly chicks who didn't have a choice, they had the bust their ass because no guy worth his salt would even give her a chance. An even better question would be how many hot feminist have there ever been in the history of ever.

Post: #4

^As Slubu puts it:

Ugly girls have jobs
Hot girls have Range Rovers.

(Los Angeles and especially Manhattan Beach is ground zero for this.)

Post: #5

Good for them.

But I personally have no interest in working my ass off just just to provide for some woman at home. Still strikes me as a disposable thing. Not sure what those men in the 50's were thinking.

Post: #6

(09-24-2014 07:05 PM)Old Fritz Wrote:  Good for them.

But I personally have no interest in working my ass off just just to provide for some woman at home. Still strikes me as a disposable thing. Not sure what those men in the 50's were thinking.

Men never really did it to benefit themselves. It was always for the betterment of society (meaning stable procreation and contributing beta males). Taking one for the team, so to speak.

But, the caveat, they were highly respected and cherished for their sacrifices. Now, with all the harpies shrieking at them constantly, they've (we've) split into 3 factions: betas (who cling to the old ways), Cads (who cling to the new ways, soft harems and the like), and MGTOW who sail off into the sunset.

Post: #7

(09-24-2014 05:45 PM)PrimeTime32 Wrote:  I've noticed the the hottest chicks don't really have to work. There's a slim chance that you'll see a dime working at Starbucks. Looking back on it feminism was invented by ugly chicks who didn't have a choice, they had the bust their ass because no guy worth his salt would even give her a chance. An even better question would be how many hot feminist have there ever been in the history of ever.

That's what Tom Leykis always says: The Fortune list of the 50 most powerful women is full of uggo's...those women studied hard because they knew no man would ever pay their bills! Hot chicks have men who will pay their bills.

Post: #8

(09-24-2014 05:45 PM)PrimeTime32 Wrote:  Looking back on it feminism was invented by ugly chicks who didn't have a choice, they had the bust their ass because no guy worth his salt would even give her a chance.

Feminism also had many lesbian founders.
Imagine that, an ideology founded in part by women who have no sexual interest in men has pervaded its way into the heart of western civilization as the norm.

Post: #9

(09-24-2014 11:11 PM)NomadofEU Wrote:  

(09-24-2014 05:45 PM)PrimeTime32 Wrote:  Looking back on it feminism was invented by ugly chicks who didn't have a choice, they had the bust their ass because no guy worth his salt would even give her a chance.

Feminism also had many lesbian founders.
Imagine that, an ideology founded in part by women who have no sexual interest in men has pervaded its way into the heart of western civilization as the norm.

Don't forget the Marxist who's intention was to destroy the family.

Post: #10

Conclusion from the last 50 years: Women do not want to be happy. They rather choose drama.

Post: #11

On the topic of housewives...

Coworker was just talking to another coworker (two women) about how some of the old shows she lets her kid watch are sexist (Flintstones were one of the shows mentioned...specifically they talked about Wilma and Betty just being these perfect little housewives).

Now I was sitting there and obviously overheard. I wasn't going to take a this side or that side (whether or not women should be housewives or not), but ask the question of historical accuracy.

Me: My response was, what if they're accurately portraying the times? (even if 'accurately portraying' means the show is an accurate portrayal of the culture at the time)

Her: Well you wouldn't want to perpetuate those ideas. Like racism and slavery, they're historical, but you wouldn't want to perpetuate the idea.

Me: Well no, but you wouldn't want to lie and portray history inaccurately. Accuracy is testable to a degree. Perpetuation of an idea is impossible to test. You can say whether certain things are accurate far easier than you can see if they're influencing a culture one way or the other.

(this was exchanged a few times where we went back and forth, and she didn't appear to understand, although I know she is a very smart person (do people act like they don't understand when they have no response?))

Her: If I just say ok, will that end the discussion?

Me: Well yeah, I'm just not sure you understand the point.

(then back to work)

So that's one way of challenging these retarded "women not in the workforce are less valuable" or "women working are better for society" ideas.

What's funny is I wasn't suggesting that society is better or worse with women either staying at home or working or whatever, I was simply stating that erasing history from memory might not be the most ideal thing to do as a society or with individuals within society.

I would think accuracy is at least as important as evolving cultural norms, and if one is testable and the other isn't, you would err on the side of getting one of those right. Of course, the discussion never made it to that point.

I wish I'd have said I was offended. To say that perpetuating or promoting the stay at home wife and or mom (a homemaker) is a bad thing is terribly offensive to my mom, sister-in-laws, and many of my friends' wives who are homemakers.

Post: #12

(09-24-2014 05:08 PM)Crackshot Wrote:  Official 'well-being' index shows those who do not work because they are caring for children or loved-ones have strongest belief that their life is 'worthwhile'

Mothers who have put their career aside to care for their children have a stronger sense that their lives are “worthwhile” than the rest of society, official figures suggest.

Laura Perrin, a barrister turned full-time mother who campaigns from the group Mothers At Home Matter said the figures showed that government policies designed to encourage more parents to work full time could be doing more harm than good.

“This just goes to show that the idea that we are all at home depressed and unhappy looking after our own children – which a lot of politicians would like to believe – is simply wrong,” she said.

“It is clearly a worthwhile vocation, should you choose to do it.”

The group campaigns for greater recognition of marriage and traditional family life in the tax system. It argues that the Coalition’s childcare tax breaks for couples in which both parents work, penalises families in which one parent has given up work to care for the children.

“David Cameron has set his face against the more traditional set-up with a mother at home caring for her children but his own figures show that not only are they happy but they recognise their lives are worthwhile," she said.

New findings from the UK’s national “well-being” index show that those classed as economically inactive because they are caring for a family or home are also among the happiest people in Britain.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-...lives.html

And in related news, new scientific study finds that the Pope is Catholic.