Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 192

Thread: Miss California

  1. #121
    Forum translator Ptichka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    4,430
    Doris, perhaps you're right on girls vs. boys after all - http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090601/...s_math_girls_1

    "Analysis of data from 15-year-old students participating in the 2003 Program for International Student Assessment likewise indicated that as many, if not more girls than boys scored above the 99th percentile in Iceland, Thailand, and the United Kingdom"
    [...]
    "It's not that everywhere in the world there are fewer girls than boys in the top 1 percent,"
    [...]
    The United States ranks 31 out of 128 nations on [the World Economic Forum's 2007 Gender Gap Index]
    [...]

  2. #122
    Custom Title antmanb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK - Manchester
    Posts
    4,913
    Just on the issue of "stability" of a married person (or one with a child) over the single person. I think it depends very much on the career. I'm a lawyer and more often than not being single is seen as a positive because you've got no-one to go home to which means you have no "excuse" to not put in all the extra hours that are expected. It's much easier for the Partners to demand that you give up your night/weekend etc if they know that you won't be upsetting a partner/family.

    It actually became so infuriating to me that I was always the one asked to give up their free time that I ended up making up a relationship so that the badness of losing your free time was actually spread around everyone more fairly. Free time is free time and I disagreed strongly that mine was apparently worth less because i didn't have a partner or child.

    Ant

  3. #123
    Forum translator Ptichka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    4,430
    Quote Originally Posted by antmanb View Post
    Just on the issue of "stability" of a married person (or one with a child) over the single person. I think it depends very much on the career. I'm a lawyer and more often than not being single is seen as a positive because you've got no-one to go home to which means you have no "excuse" to not put in all the extra hours that are expected. It's much easier for the Partners to demand that you give up your night/weekend etc if they know that you won't be upsetting a partner/family
    Ant, I think lawyers are in a category in and of themselves. A good friend of mine is a corporate lawyer. She says that everyone she works with either has no children or has a stay-at-home spouse (and yes, that includes a couple of women with stay-at-home husbands). She felt for a while that the only way for her to have a baby was to convince her mother to retire (her mom had a relatively low paying job so my friend could make up for it financially without any difficulty). In her case, though, things really did work out. Her husband got a teaching position in another state, and she asked her law firm if she could work remotely part time (she calculated that 60% of her work could be done remotely, so that's what she offered to work for). They agreed, and she's now a mother of two, working from home part time (which actually amounts to about the same as the rest of the work calls full time).

  4. #124
    Custom Title antmanb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK - Manchester
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Ptichka View Post
    Ant, I think lawyers are in a category in and of themselves. A good friend of mine is a corporate lawyer. She says that everyone she works with either has no children or has a stay-at-home spouse (and yes, that includes a couple of women with stay-at-home husbands). She felt for a while that the only way for her to have a baby was to convince her mother to retire (her mom had a relatively low paying job so my friend could make up for it financially without any difficulty). In her case, though, things really did work out. Her husband got a teaching position in another state, and she asked her law firm if she could work remotely part time (she calculated that 60% of her work could be done remotely, so that's what she offered to work for). They agreed, and she's now a mother of two, working from home part time (which actually amounts to about the same as the rest of the work calls full time).
    Yes that does sound like familiar territory. I actually have to say that law firms seem to be comnig out of the stone age in terms of flexible working. Though i suspect you would struggle with London or New York Corporate outfits, think most firms are willing to allow some flexibility (even though hours are still incredibly high). Being single really is seen as an asset especially since most Partners experience divorce on their rise up through the ranks to become a Partner. That's pretty sad really, so it's good to hear when people make things work for them.

    Ant

  5. #125
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by Ptichka View Post
    Ant, I think lawyers are in a category in and of themselves.
    Can't go along with one exception. Single people are always left to close up shop, get to work earlier, because they do not have family comitments. They are used as one to do the extra work when neccessary in any organization or job.

    Of course some marrieds do toil later at the work place by choice, but never before a get-a-way weekend. They also have to leave early because of the kids. yeah. That's ok the single person can finish the job.

  6. #126
    I like pie. Tonichelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Kenai, AK
    Posts
    18,728
    my dad never got special priviledges for being a "family man"... he was the one that got guilt tripped into staying late... or working extra hours... but he got his way in other ways... he got to bring his kid to work more than just one day a year
    Last edited by Tonichelle; 06-03-2009 at 09:19 PM.

  7. #127
    Forum translator Ptichka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    4,430
    Joe, isn't there a "payback" though? In my experience, the people who don't do that extra work are never promoted. They are also among the first candidates for the layoffs. (All companies pay lip service to being "family friendly" but it's a smokescreen 95% of the time.) I sometimes leave early, sure - but every time I do, I then end up working from home after putting my son to bed, meaning at the time when most people are drinking their beers in front of the TV.

  8. #128
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Well, without getting too involved, there are so many factors (mostly clandestine) that promotion opportunities go through. A non married couple (boss and secretary) were being actively close in the garage of an office building but they got caught. She was fired. he was promoted.

  9. #129
    Forum translator Ptichka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    4,430
    Joe, how long ago was this?!

  10. #130
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Some 30 years ago. The boss was not coveting his neighbor's wife; just his single secretary.

  11. #131
    L'art pour l'art Medusa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,752

  12. #132
    Wicked Yankee Girl dorispulaski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Staring at the ocean and smiling.
    Posts
    17,094
    Yup back then, it was often that way.

    Some 20 years ago, a cleaning lady was caught at work with the married guy who ran the chemical mix room at IBM. She was fired, he was forcibly retired, and his son, who was a manager was vilely embarrassed.

  13. #133
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    452
    Actually, "traditional marriage" isn't just what yet another arrogant athiest on youtube claims in a bitter one-sided rant about the bible. It IS what has worked for society for thousands of years.

    In fairness, in our modern western society, traditional marriage is just about dead. Our "traditional" marriage now is a single mom, a few out-of-control neglected, undisciplined, internet-addicted children, and an absent father whose only role is to pay child support. It's the new American dream! I don't see gay marriage making the state of marriage much worse, per se. But I do see the complete and utter abandonment of "traditional" values eventually destroying our society.

    Perhaps someday, a human society will manage to figure out how to keep from imploding without adhering to rigid moral standards and god concepts. I doubt it.

  14. #134
    Custom Title antmanb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK - Manchester
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Particle Man View Post
    Actually, "traditional marriage" isn't just what yet another arrogant athiest on youtube claims in a bitter one-sided rant about the bible. It IS what has worked for society for thousands of years.
    Well it "worked" if by "working" you mean that it was all fine and dandy while everyone accepted that the women were simply chattles being bought and sold by men. Men who, by virtue of the sale and purchase contract they'd entered into could do whatever they wanted with that chattle including physically and sexually abuse it.

    Ant

  15. #135
    L'art pour l'art Medusa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,752
    Quote Originally Posted by antmanb View Post
    Well it "worked" if by "working" you mean that it was all fine and dandy while everyone accepted that the women were simply chattles being bought and sold by men. Men who, by virtue of the sale and purchase contract they'd entered into could do whatever they wanted with that chattle including physically and sexually abuse it.
    Yeah, I am pretty sure that he means that. Perhaps he also means that the marriages were stable, because in 80% of the population not many women made it past 35 because they died of childbirth or of simple exhaustion after getting married at 15, having 12 children (7 of them died before turning 5) before they turned 30.

    You just have to love people who claim that things were so much better 50/70/100 etc. years ago. Everytime one of my elder relatives start a sentence with "When we were young, that would never have happened" and I am always very close to saying "When you were young this entire country was full of mass-murdering lunatics". Really, when were things that much better than today for everyone! You will always finds time periods where one group of people were living an idyllic "ideal" life. But how often was that life only possible because other people (women, black people, slaves, simple workers, children...) suffered?

Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •