Ian Winthorpe III posted:Then why is it more objectionable for them to have to work than men or non-pregnant women? Both are objectionable. Forcing pregnant women to work is worse for the same reasons plus added health reasons.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 01:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:32 |
|
|
Haters Objector posted:You know what I want heavily pregnant women doing? Operating forklifts and tiling roofs. And yet they're perfectly capable of designing and constructing massive freeway interchanges while they're expecting. http://articles.latimes.com/2004/may/21/local/me-reece21 quote:Marilyn Jorgenson Reece, the first woman in California to be registered as a civil engineer and the designer of the San Diego-Santa Monica freeway interchange in Los Angeles, has died. She was 77.  Jeez if some of you were around in those days she wouldn't have even been allowed to drive up to the shops.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
So it's settled. Every pregnant should build highways while gestating. Also today I learned that the physical effects of pregnancy are experienced identically by every woman.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
A lesson given to you by a man, no less.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
Ian Winthorpe III posted:Then why is it more objectionable for them to have to work than men or non-pregnant women? The original issue, from the article posted, which you didn't bother to read, isn't about them being at work. It was about what an unemployed pregnant woman is going to do if she has to wait 6 months for Centrelink. Pregnant women can work no one is disputing that, it is very much dependent on their role though, Office based work or call centre, not so much a problem for a longer period, if she is a bricklayer or mechanic then it can become a real issue for the health of their child. But it would be medically inadvisable, by today's standards, for a pregnant woman to start laboring in the mines on a 3-6 month contract surrounded by heavy metals and weighty objects Ian Winthorpe III posted:And yet they're perfectly capable of designing and constructing massive freeway interchanges while they're expecting. 1963 is not 2014. People still smoked and drank when they were pregnant back then. Nice irrelevant article though. Now gently caress off back to your troll hole. Ol Sweepy fucked around with this message at 02:02 on Jun 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:00
|
|
|
Haters Objector posted:So it's settled. Every pregnant should build highways while gestating. "Breakdown and Emergency lane that can be changed to a third lane if the other two reach capacity." "That's silly, you pregnant and clearly intended the lane to be used to satisfy your cravings." And that, gentlemen, is a possible reason why the M5 East is loving awful.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-06-11/carbon-tax-isn-t-killing-jobs-in-australiaquote:Australia's carbon tax experiment doesn't back up those warnings. Although the country's macroeconomic indicators have flagged since the tax took effect, that had little to do with the tax, economists say. Meanwhile, the tax succeeded at reducing emissions. What Abbott paints as a cautionary tale may instead be a model for the U.S. and others to follow. US take on the carbon tax. Interesting read and pretty detailed too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
Bompacho posted:The original issue, from the article posted, which you didn't bother to read, isn't about them being at work. It was about what an unemployed pregnant woman is going to do if she has to wait 6 months for Centrelink. Well that's good because even without child women already avoid such jobs like the plague: http://www.women.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/268010/3000_WNSW-OccasionalPaper_document_ART.pdf quote:Fewer than two percent of construction, automotive and electrical tradespeople in Australia today are women. There were just 676 female carpenters, 931 female motor mechanics, 638 female plumbers and 1,432 female electricians nation-wide in 2011 within a total technicians and trades workforce of nearly 1.43 million people, just over 14 percent of the workforce. Let me know when the first pregnant woman is reluctantly forced by the government to push wheelbarrows of bricks around; in the meantime, maybe have a bex and cool it on the scaremongering. Ian Winthorpe III fucked around with this message at 02:18 on Jun 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
Retail, hospitality, aged care, nursing. You stupid gently caress.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
So on the 22nd of May I embarked on an odessy. How easy would it be for me to claim the $300 low income supplement that was my personal compensation for the carbon tax? I can apply online! After creating a new account (for gov services online) I was able to attempt to access my existing Centerlink account (from 10 years ago) I fortunately had all the documentation they required (on-line), Some of which was truly bizarre but I digress, and a mere three hours later I was greeted by a screen that informed me that the 'Service Unavailable'. Undaunted I logged out and back in reentered a short story of information and was eventually informed that I would need to front Centerlink and present documents. It was entirely vague about what exact documents I needed so I took everything. Because I nominally have full time employment it took me a little while before I was able to make time to get to Centerlink and was told that it would be a 10 to 15 minute wait tops. It was more like 20 but that's being reasonably petty. A very surly gentleman checked over my documents and disputed my claim that it was very vague on what I needed to bring in. I than asked what was the point in me providing a document from the ATO that I know Centerlink has online access to. He informed me "He doesn't assess the claims and so has no idea." He photocopied the document in question and dismissed me. I asked how long it would take and he helpfully informed me that "He had no idea". I got an email yesterday to say I would be given the money today. I checked and amazingly enough I did get the money! So three weeks wait and about four hours work. I guess that's OK. My chief observation is that I'm throbbingly glad I don't have to deal with those fuckers on a day to day basis.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
Haters Objector posted:Also today I learned that the physical effects of pregnancy are experienced identically by every woman. Today I learned that because one pregnant woman had a positive employment experience in an engineering design job it is wrong to express particular concern for depriving poor pregnant women of their welfare. IWC why are you still so poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
Honestly, Bompacho, it's not like they're going to be literally forced to go report in at a job, they're just going to be stripped of any social safety net during a time when it would be difficult to perform any work. Or to even find work in the first place, so actually you're being quite disingenuous for bothering to complain about those non-existent working conditions they're not experiencing while they're also not getting welfare.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
Centerlink would not let me log in or change my password or anything for all of May, and then they cancelled my youth allowance because I couldn't report my income without waiting for 2 hours on the phone, which was impossible for me to do. The online system sucks. E: And it's likely to happen again because for some dumb reason there are 2 account number associated with my name and the girl on the phone couldn't fix it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
Tony really seems to be adopting the "Wreck the place as much as possible before we get kicked out." strategy doesn't he? Incidentally, I was telling someone about Tony's hilarious antics earlier and I had a slip of the tongue and called him "Tory Abbott", how correct is this? 
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
Ian Winthorpe III posted:Well that's good because even without child women already avoid such jobs like the plague: Nice work on skipping over the fact that not all women experience the same pregnancy and that under the 'earn or learn' measure, newly unemployed may have to take the first work offered to them, if they can find any because, though many wouldn't admit it, employers would probably avoid hiring a pregnant woman, even though it is against the law. Also gently caress you that 2% (plus the sectors Haters object mentioned) of women. Good luck.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
can't work, food baby
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
Bifauxnen posted:Honestly, Bompacho, it's not like they're going to be literally forced to go report in at a job, they're just going to be stripped of any social safety net during a time when it would be difficult to perform any work. Or to even find work in the first place, so actually you're being quite disingenuous for bothering to complain about those non-existent working conditions they're not experiencing while they're also not getting welfare. As are men, therefore equal rights which if i'm not mistaken is one of the goals of feminism. I don't remember the Suferagettes or Reclaim the Night holding placards saying 'Equal Rights Now! But With Exceptions Based On Hoary Old Patriarchal Notions of Feminine Delicacy!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
Ian Winthorpe III posted:As are men, therefore equal rights which if i'm not mistaken is one of the goals of feminism. I don't remember the Suferagettes or Reclaim the Night holding placards saying 'Equal Rights Now! But With Exceptions Based On Hoary Old Patriarchal Notions of Feminine Delicacy! do you understand that pregnant women are going to find it more difficult to find work because employers are biased against them
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
Ian Winthorpe III posted:As are men, therefore equal rights which if i'm not mistaken is one of the goals of feminism. I don't remember the Suferagettes or Reclaim the Night holding placards saying 'Equal Rights Now! But With Exceptions Based On Hoary Old Patriarchal Notions of Feminine Delicacy! I'm pretty sure we already did a bunch of complaining on behalf of the young men though, included in the Venn diagram of literally everyone under 30? Might've been a couple pages back. Could be easy to miss I suppose. Realtalk though IWC, why are you even doing this. This isn't exactly echo-chamber-combo-breaker Zen Master material here, you're more like everyone's one friend on Facebook who shares that 9/11 conspiracy video that's easily proven to be willfully falsified cause you're "not saying one way or the other, it just makes u think".
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:34
|
|
Ian Winthorpe III posted:As are men, therefore equal rights which if i'm not mistaken is one of the goals of feminism. I don't remember the Suferagettes or Reclaim the Night holding placards saying 'Equal Rights Now! But With Exceptions Based On Hoary Old Patriarchal Notions of Feminine Delicacy! Ahahah, so real actual health issues caused by pregnancy are now "Hoary Old Patriarchal Notions of Feminine Delicacy", but I'm guessing that is only true when it serves your argument. P.S. Go back to the MRA pit from whence you came and  .
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
Bifauxnen posted:Realtalk though IWC, why are you even doing this. This isn't exactly echo-chamber-combo-breaker Zen Master material here, you're more like everyone's one friend on Facebook who shares that 9/11 conspiracy video that's easily proven to be willfully falsified cause you're "not saying one way or the other, it just makes u think". I'm not saying 'it makes u think', i'm saying that men should stop presuming that women are little china dolls who need their leadership and wisdom and petty, patronizing concessions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:38
|
|
Ian Winthorpe III posted:I'm not saying 'it makes u think', i'm saying that men should stop presuming that women are little china dolls who need their leadership and wisdom and petty, patronizing concessions. That's great maybe you should go post somewhere where men are saying that.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
Haters Objector posted:That's great maybe you should go post somewhere where men are saying that. Well I can't post in the Liberal Party Room so I guess D&D: Auspol it is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:42
|
|
|
Ian Winthorpe III posted:I'm not saying 'it makes u think', i'm saying that men should stop presuming that women are little china dolls who need their leadership and wisdom and petty, patronizing concessions. No one has suggested that, actually, the welfare cuts are fine but we should make a special exception for pregnant women. As Bifauxnen points out, there has been vocal, persistent, constant opposition to the welfare cuts as opposed to everyone. This latest flurry of posting about pregnant women is a highlighting of a particular way in which these cuts are going to affect a particular bracket of society. In conclusion, kill yourself
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
Squeezing as much economic labour out of pregnant women as possible--classy poo poo, Australia. Nan's a bit frail but she can still do pick-packing in her spare time between doctor's appointments. I have no legs but I can do monkey-bar testing whenever possible. If you're not operating at maximum economic potential then you're not living the good life.
Orkin Mang fucked around with this message at 02:51 on Jun 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
Those On My Left posted:No one has suggested that, actually, the welfare cuts are fine but we should make a special exception for pregnant women. As Bifauxnen points out, there has been vocal, persistent, constant opposition to the welfare cuts as opposed to everyone. Actually I said our opposition "could be easy to miss I suppose", but just in case you didn't realize it IWC, that was actually sarcasm!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:50
|
|
|
Everyone's also ignoring that regardless of whether a pregnant woman is willing and capable of working, a pregnant woman in Australia is incredibly unlikely to be hired for any job - in fact, employers are more likely to lay them off, even if it is illegal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:50
|
|
|
HookShot posted:Everyone's also ignoring that regardless of whether a pregnant woman is willing and capable of working, a pregnant woman in Australia is incredibly unlikely to be hired for any job - in fact, employers are more likely to lay them off, even if it is illegal. She should set up a small business. She could make marmalade and sell it out the front of her house, or sell cheap hand jobs to job-creators. Just because you're pregnant doesn't mean you can't show a bit of entrepreneurship.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
And look, the government is giving her some seed capital in the form of the Baby Bonus. It would be crazy not to start a business with that kind of bunce
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:55
|
|
|
HookShot posted:Everyone's also ignoring that regardless of whether a pregnant woman is willing and capable of working, a pregnant woman in Australia is incredibly unlikely to be hired for any job - in fact, employers are more likely to lay them off, even if it is illegal. oi hookshot i was pointing that out 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
Those On My Left posted:do you understand that pregnant women are going to find it more difficult to find work because employers are biased against them Well given this reality I would suggest that a wise choice of partner or a comprehensive financial plan would be advisable before embarking upon a pregnancy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
Actually if they considered the benefits of prostitution there is a considerable saving on contraceptives available to them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
Ian Winthorpe III posted:Well given this reality I would suggest that a wise choice of partner or a comprehensive financial plan would be advisable before embarking upon a pregnancy. True, I can't think of a single situation where a pregnant woman might not have a well-off partner and a big stash of money beforehand.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
You idiots just can't resist responding to trolls, holy poo poo. Either skip the posts entirely or empty quote them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
CROWS EVERYWHERE posted:True, I can't think of a single situation where a pregnant woman might not have a well-off partner and a big stash of money beforehand. I can: poor planning and a lack of impulse control.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
Ian Winthorpe III posted:Well given this reality I would suggest that a wise choice of partner or a comprehensive financial plan would be advisable before embarking upon a pregnancy. This is your laziest outing yet, you lovely, lovely hack. Just go away.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 03:08
|
|
|
Those On My Left posted:This is your laziest outing yet, you lovely, lovely hack. Just go away. Incisive meta-commentary, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
gay picnic defence posted:In other news, world is fukt: Is it bad that I'm worried that it will take them too long to decide to nuke us to prevent any further damage, because the longer they wait, the riskier the outcome of nukes adding to global warming?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
Orkin Mang posted:You idiots just can't resist responding to trolls, holy poo poo. Either skip the posts entirely or empty quote them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:32 |
|
|
Ian Winthorpe III posted:Well given this reality I would suggest that a wise choice of partner or a comprehensive financial plan would be advisable before embarking upon a pregnancy. There you have it kids: Marry for money not love. Babies are only for people with Financial plans. If you are already unemployed then good luck, filthy pleb.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 03:12
|
|