Tell an opinion you have that is in the strong minority

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the jury in the Zimmerman case reached the right verdict; innocent little Trayvon was trying to bash Zimmerman's skull open against a concrete sidewalk (Trayvon wasn't as innocent as first portrayed). He was a violent punk who turned into the aggressor.

But Zimmerman - while not a murderer - should never have followed Trayvon around; the guy's behavior before and since that night suggest he has serious delusions about being a cop when he is not; following Trayvon was not his job. His weird personality and lack of judgement will eventually land him behind bars.

He also was not driven by racism; he's a person of color himself! Justice was right to drop the civil rights investigation ; Zimmerman used to volunteer as a tutor / mentor to disadvantaged black kids. Zimmerman was anti-crime, not anti-black.

Finally, this administration handled the whole affair miserably.

+1 AA's should focus on educating themselves to get out of poverty. Not marching for the life of a slain thug (who imo got what he deserved)

1) I'm an African-American who has not need to focus on getting out of poverty. Shockingly, not all of "us" are born into poverty. Secondly, not everyone who was marching for a slain thug were uneducated. There were *gasp* black lawyers, and other professionals out there marching! Please don't assume all African-Americans are either in poverty, or have worked their way out. That's like saying white people should focus on getting an education to work their way out of trailer parks.

Every ethnic group has to work their way out of poverty. The difference was that the catholics and other groups did not march for their thugs and criminals but instead worked to better themselves as a group

So, AA haven't worked to better themselves as a group? Civil Rights movements? Fighting for our equality and rights?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stay at home moms who push their daughters academically are hypocrites.

How so? You have no idea what they've done academically/professionally before AND after being a SAHM.

Seriously. The PP's statement just made me laugh. Among my circle of SAHMs are graduates of Brown, Cornell, Yale, Davidson, UMichigan, and Chapel Hill, and myriad great state universities, to name just a few. These women were Big Law attorneys, Wall St. analysts, marketing execs, psychologists, and architects. They are now Girl Scout leaders and volunteers, among other things. One thing we all have in common: we decided to lean OUT in order to take care of our children. Will we one day return to the workforce? Sure. But we're all big believers in sequencing, and for right now, being home with our kids is where we want to be. Hopefully our daughters will do well in school too and one day be able to make these choices for themselves too. Isn't that what feminism is all about - choices? As for the PP who insists that SAHMs either aren't educated or are wasting their education - that just speaks volumes about your own level of education. You're truly showing your ignorance.

Why aren't you able to do both? Once your kids are in school you are just being lazy then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the jury in the Zimmerman case reached the right verdict; innocent little Trayvon was trying to bash Zimmerman's skull open against a concrete sidewalk (Trayvon wasn't as innocent as first portrayed). He was a violent punk who turned into the aggressor.

But Zimmerman - while not a murderer - should never have followed Trayvon around; the guy's behavior before and since that night suggest he has serious delusions about being a cop when he is not; following Trayvon was not his job. His weird personality and lack of judgement will eventually land him behind bars.

He also was not driven by racism; he's a person of color himself! Justice was right to drop the civil rights investigation ; Zimmerman used to volunteer as a tutor / mentor to disadvantaged black kids. Zimmerman was anti-crime, not anti-black.

Finally, this administration handled the whole affair miserably.

+1 AA's should focus on educating themselves to get out of poverty. Not marching for the life of a slain thug (who imo got what he deserved)

1) I'm an African-American who has not need to focus on getting out of poverty. Shockingly, not all of "us" are born into poverty. Secondly, not everyone who was marching for a slain thug were uneducated. There were *gasp* black lawyers, and other professionals out there marching! Please don't assume all African-Americans are either in poverty, or have worked their way out. That's like saying white people should focus on getting an education to work their way out of trailer parks.

Every ethnic group has to work their way out of poverty. The difference was that the catholics and other groups did not march for their thugs and criminals but instead worked to better themselves as a group

So, AA haven't worked to better themselves as a group? Civil Rights movements? Fighting for our equality and rights?

So did the Catholics and they didn't complain half as much

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the jury in the Zimmerman case reached the right verdict; innocent little Trayvon was trying to bash Zimmerman's skull open against a concrete sidewalk (Trayvon wasn't as innocent as first portrayed). He was a violent punk who turned into the aggressor.

But Zimmerman - while not a murderer - should never have followed Trayvon around; the guy's behavior before and since that night suggest he has serious delusions about being a cop when he is not; following Trayvon was not his job. His weird personality and lack of judgement will eventually land him behind bars.

He also was not driven by racism; he's a person of color himself! Justice was right to drop the civil rights investigation ; Zimmerman used to volunteer as a tutor / mentor to disadvantaged black kids. Zimmerman was anti-crime, not anti-black.

Finally, this administration handled the whole affair miserably.

+1 AA's should focus on educating themselves to get out of poverty. Not marching for the life of a slain thug (who imo got what he deserved)

1) I'm an African-American who has not need to focus on getting out of poverty. Shockingly, not all of "us" are born into poverty. Secondly, not everyone who was marching for a slain thug were uneducated. There were *gasp* black lawyers, and other professionals out there marching! Please don't assume all African-Americans are either in poverty, or have worked their way out. That's like saying white people should focus on getting an education to work their way out of trailer parks.

Every ethnic group has to work their way out of poverty. The difference was that the catholics and other groups did not march for their thugs and criminals but instead worked to better themselves as a group

So, AA haven't worked to better themselves as a group? Civil Rights movements? Fighting for our equality and rights?

So did the Catholics and they didn't complain half as much

Nor did they spend 245 years in slavery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am absolutely shocked by the SAHM hating posts. "Lazy", "living off another person's dime," "insufferable"?
My spouse and I will make decisions based on our families' needs and you will make yours. We will all work hard and do the best we can. Some of us will teach our children to treat others with kindness and respect. The haters will teach hate.
I hope my kids don't cross paths with yours

Do you not see the language directed towards WOHMs, not to mention at childcare providers?

Really??????? No, I don't see it. (Not pp)

Just from this page:
the mom who palms her dc off to virtual strangers for most of their waking hours

Let's include the whole quote you just pulled that from so we aren't taking these words out of context. Don't be lazy, pp.

Sorry, the rest talked about how bad it is to leave your kids with a person who doesn't speak English well. You know, hardworking women providing for their families. Really reflects well on SAHMs, that poster.

Since you are too lazy, I will show the quote you are summarizing:

I would say the opposite. It takes a lot of strength and courage to rely completely on a single income and to deal with babies and toddlers for months on end. This is the "lazy" choice, not the mom who palms her dc off to virtual strangers for most of their waking hours

Pp, show me where, in this ENTIRE quote, it talks about how bad it is to leave your kids with a person who doesn't speak English well?

You're right. That was a different poster agreeing with the first.

Just so we are clear, the poster that we are both quoting did not post in response to the poster who said people leave their children with people who barely speak English. She posted and then others responded and someone responded about others not speaking English.

And a question for you, pp. Can we agree that there is A LOT more hate for SAHMs than there is for WOHM? And remember, when you are sending your child to day care, the nanny, the babysitter, or whatever, you are PAYING that person to take care of your child/ren, so that qualifies this work (caring for a child/ren) as a job. Just because some mothers stay home and don't pay for someone else to do it, doesn't mean it isn't work/a job to be a SAHM. Some families feel it isn't cost effective to pay someone for childcare, OR they would just rather not because they want to keep their children at home. In my case, my child was born with health problems and he needed me to stay home and take care of him. So I find it very hurtful when people are so disdainful towards SAHMs. I don't judge working mothers, and I am often there to help them out when they need someone. I would hate to think that any of my friends that are working mothers are secretly judging me the way some of you are here on DCUM.

Being with your own kids is not and never will be a job. It is your responsibility. I pay other people because my DC are not their responsibility. Big difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the jury in the Zimmerman case reached the right verdict; innocent little Trayvon was trying to bash Zimmerman's skull open against a concrete sidewalk (Trayvon wasn't as innocent as first portrayed). He was a violent punk who turned into the aggressor.

But Zimmerman - while not a murderer - should never have followed Trayvon around; the guy's behavior before and since that night suggest he has serious delusions about being a cop when he is not; following Trayvon was not his job. His weird personality and lack of judgement will eventually land him behind bars.

He also was not driven by racism; he's a person of color himself! Justice was right to drop the civil rights investigation ; Zimmerman used to volunteer as a tutor / mentor to disadvantaged black kids. Zimmerman was anti-crime, not anti-black.

Finally, this administration handled the whole affair miserably.

+1 AA's should focus on educating themselves to get out of poverty. Not marching for the life of a slain thug (who imo got what he deserved)

1) I'm an African-American who has not need to focus on getting out of poverty. Shockingly, not all of "us" are born into poverty. Secondly, not everyone who was marching for a slain thug were uneducated. There were *gasp* black lawyers, and other professionals out there marching! Please don't assume all African-Americans are either in poverty, or have worked their way out. That's like saying white people should focus on getting an education to work their way out of trailer parks.

Every ethnic group has to work their way out of poverty. The difference was that the catholics and other groups did not march for their thugs and criminals but instead worked to better themselves as a group

So, AA haven't worked to better themselves as a group? Civil Rights movements? Fighting for our equality and rights?

So did the Catholics and they didn't complain half as much

Nor did they spend 245 years in slavery.

More like 500

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Damn. SAHMs - consider yourself lucky to have this choice. My husband passed and I'm working and trying to be the best mom I can. Please don't make me feel guilty that I can't stay home. I wish I could.

Ignore these women. You're being incredibly strong and setting a great example. Hang in there.

I don't see it as a WOH vs SAH mom. I've known plenty of really great moms who work outside the home. I've never met a good mother who would spend 50+ hours a week away from her children. My sister was 8 months pregnant when she found our her then husband was having an affair with her best friend. She moved across the country to be in a lower cost of living area and closer to family. Of course she has to work. But she knew she couldn't continue to work the hours she had been working and be a good mother at the same time.

Tell me how you spend your time and I'll tell you what your priorities really are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, in Australia there is some Muslim lawyer woman that screemed intolerance over a t-shirt that said love it or leave, regarding the national flag. If she hadn't made a stink over it, no one would be sending her hate mail. Personally, I feel the same way. If you hate America so much GTFO, whether you're white, black, purple whatever.

You poor misguided soul! This has become the "duke it out over SAHM" thread - far from the original header.... so sorry! You will have to start a NEW thread (which, will, of course, become another SAHM thread...) oh well. This really is a one-note town.

Yes, this thread rapidly disintegrated and why? Oh, that's right. Because some moron chose to call SAHMs lazy and then others chimed in with their agreement. See what happens when you denigrate someone's lifestyle because you just don't approve of it? People tend to defend themselves.

I actually think it started with the "you can have it all" posts. SAHMs were bashing first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Damn. SAHMs - consider yourself lucky to have this choice. My husband passed and I'm working and trying to be the best mom I can. Please don't make me feel guilty that I can't stay home. I wish I could.

Ignore these women. You're being incredibly strong and setting a great example. Hang in there.

I don't see it as a WOH vs SAH mom. I've known plenty of really great moms who work outside the home. I've never met a good mother who would spend 50+ hours a week away from her children. My sister was 8 months pregnant when she found our her then husband was having an affair with her best friend. She moved across the country to be in a lower cost of living area and closer to family. Of course she has to work. But she knew she couldn't continue to work the hours she had been working and be a good mother at the same time.

Tell me how you spend your time and I'll tell you what your priorities really are.

The fact that you are posting this in response to a widowed woman is absoutely despicable. I pray you're too stupid to realize you did that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the jury in the Zimmerman case reached the right verdict; innocent little Trayvon was trying to bash Zimmerman's skull open against a concrete sidewalk (Trayvon wasn't as innocent as first portrayed). He was a violent punk who turned into the aggressor.

But Zimmerman - while not a murderer - should never have followed Trayvon around; the guy's behavior before and since that night suggest he has serious delusions about being a cop when he is not; following Trayvon was not his job. His weird personality and lack of judgement will eventually land him behind bars.

He also was not driven by racism; he's a person of color himself! Justice was right to drop the civil rights investigation ; Zimmerman used to volunteer as a tutor / mentor to disadvantaged black kids. Zimmerman was anti-crime, not anti-black.

Finally, this administration handled the whole affair miserably.

+1 AA's should focus on educating themselves to get out of poverty. Not marching for the life of a slain thug (who imo got what he deserved)

1) I'm an African-American who has not need to focus on getting out of poverty. Shockingly, not all of "us" are born into poverty. Secondly, not everyone who was marching for a slain thug were uneducated. There were *gasp* black lawyers, and other professionals out there marching! Please don't assume all African-Americans are either in poverty, or have worked their way out. That's like saying white people should focus on getting an education to work their way out of trailer parks.

Every ethnic group has to work their way out of poverty. The difference was that the catholics and other groups did not march for their thugs and criminals but instead worked to better themselves as a group

So, AA haven't worked to better themselves as a group? Civil Rights movements? Fighting for our equality and rights?

So did the Catholics and they didn't complain half as much

Nor did they spend 245 years in slavery.

More like 500

Persecuted for their religious beliefs? Sure. Able to not show their skin color outright? NO. No way of escaping persecution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for those of you who look down upon SAHMs: Do you consider yourself a feminist?

Not really.

Well good - at least you're honest about that. Because feminism, in my book, includes celebrating the many choices women have and their ability to go after the one that works for them.

So all the 1950s housewives were feminists, or you're a feminist because you could use your education for paid employment, yet choose not to do so?

1950s housewives didn't have the opportunities that we do today, so staying home with one's children really wasn't a choice. It was expected. Nowadays, however, women can choose to do or be whatever they want to. That's what feminism is supposed to celebrate - equal rights, equal opportunities, equal pay. I can go to school, get a good education, work, have children, continue working, decide to stay home with my kids, return to work later, or not. Who are you, or anyone else, to tell women who choose to be home with children that their choice is somehow invalid? That makes you an anti-feminist, in my book. Women are supposed to support other women, not tear them down. Guess you didn't get the memo.

Does your husband have all those freedoms too? Or is he expected to just foot the bill while you do whatever you want?

My husband - a feminist, by the way! - doesn't consider himself to be "footing the bill". Very telling that you would look at it that way. We're a team and look at our life that way. He's happy doing what he does and is also happy knowing I'm doing what I choose to do, which is take care of our kids. Why are you so concerned about other people's lives and marriage dynamics? How about you worry about your own?

What if your husband came home from work tonight and told you he was choosing to stay home too? Would that be okay with you? Would you then have to get a job so he could have his chance to stay home with the kids? It seems like if you truly believe in equal rights and that working is a decision anyone has be right to make, then this would include men being able to decide to stay home. I have a feeling a lot of SAHMs wouldn't be happy trading places with their husbands.

+10000.

At least three posters have asked this and there's been no response. Like so many SAHMs, the reason not to work is ME ME ME - not even anything to do with the kids.

[Anonymous]

Hey fool- I responded. Learn to read. And then go answer some questions I asked you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, in Australia there is some Muslim lawyer woman that screemed intolerance over a t-shirt that said love it or leave, regarding the national flag. If she hadn't made a stink over it, no one would be sending her hate mail. Personally, I feel the same way. If you hate America so much GTFO, whether you're white, black, purple whatever.

You poor misguided soul! This has become the "duke it out over SAHM" thread - far from the original header.... so sorry! You will have to start a NEW thread (which, will, of course, become another SAHM thread...) oh well. This really is a one-note town.

Yes, this thread rapidly disintegrated and why? Oh, that's right. Because some moron chose to call SAHMs lazy and then others chimed in with their agreement. See what happens when you denigrate someone's lifestyle because you just don't approve of it? People tend to defend themselves.

But, the thread specifically asked for an opinion You have that is in the strong minority. See what happens when someone has an opinion that's in the minority? They're called a moron, attacked, and accused of not raising their own children, being unhappy, and needing a day off! Kudos to you SAHM on this thread! You're quite non-judgmental yourselves. Or, can't handle someone having an opinion you don't agree with.

It would give you more confidence in your choices? Working.
So... are you saying you wouldn't take offense at having your lifestyle choice judged and mocked? Puh-leeze. The WOHMs on this thread are the biggest bunch of hypocrites I've seen in a long time. If you don't like your childcare choices denigrated, don't disparage others' in the first place.

I don't take offense. Why would I? I do your job and another one that I get paid a lot of money for, so bark away. I know I'm doing more than you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Damn. SAHMs - consider yourself lucky to have this choice. My husband passed and I'm working and trying to be the best mom I can. Please don't make me feel guilty that I can't stay home. I wish I could.

Ignore these women. You're being incredibly strong and setting a great example. Hang in there.

I don't see it as a WOH vs SAH mom. I've known plenty of really great moms who work outside the home. I've never met a good mother who would spend 50+ hours a week away from her children. My sister was 8 months pregnant when she found our her then husband was having an affair with her best friend. She moved across the country to be in a lower cost of living area and closer to family. Of course she has to work. But she knew she couldn't continue to work the hours she had been working and be a good mother at the same time.

Tell me how you spend your time and I'll tell you what your priorities really are.

The fact that you are posting this in response to a widowed woman is absoutely despicable. I pray you're too stupid to realize you did that.

I think you read my response wrong - We all do what we have to do. You can absolutely be a great mom and work - I do it. But there is no reason to work 50+ hours a week like so many posters seem to consider normal. That's not normal. And it's not healthy for mom or baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, in Australia there is some Muslim lawyer woman that screemed intolerance over a t-shirt that said love it or leave, regarding the national flag. If she hadn't made a stink over it, no one would be sending her hate mail. Personally, I feel the same way. If you hate America so much GTFO, whether you're white, black, purple whatever.

You poor misguided soul! This has become the "duke it out over SAHM" thread - far from the original header.... so sorry! You will have to start a NEW thread (which, will, of course, become another SAHM thread...) oh well. This really is a one-note town.

Yes, this thread rapidly disintegrated and why? Oh, that's right. Because some moron chose to call SAHMs lazy and then others chimed in with their agreement. See what happens when you denigrate someone's lifestyle because you just don't approve of it? People tend to defend themselves.

I actually think it started with the "you can have it all" posts. SAHMs were bashing first.

wohm's were insisting that they had perfect Tv families