Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t have a clue what someone has going on in their lives and assuming that someone with no kids has more free time than someone without kids is ridiculous. People coach, have second jobs, could be caring for other family members. This is not a fair assumption.

But ultimately having kids means you have less free time overall than someone without kids. Get real.

I think you're the one who needs to get real. As others have said, you have no clue what someone has going on in their personal lives.

My former neighbor, a teacher, worked full-time, then went home to care for her husband who was suffering from ALS (they had a daytime CNA). She certainly had zero "free time," probably even less than someone with small children.

My cousin, a teacher, worked a second job from 4pm- 9pm four days per week, plus ten-hour days on both Saturday and Sunday. That's a second full-time job. She had very little "free time."

It doesn't matter, though. It is no one else's business how much "free time" someone has, and anyone even implying that someone without children should be able to do more work than is required, is inappropriate and a violation of their privacy.

If your cousin had kids she would not have the “free time” to take that second job. She is choosing to take a second job in her free time it appears.

Her spouse could take care of the kids during that time. I know two teachers at my school who go to jobs after school until 8pm. Their spouses pick the kids up from after care at 6pm. They aren’t doing this for fun.

The PP said her teacher cousin works 4-9 pm 4 days a week during the week and then 10 hours on Sat and Sun in addition to a full time teaching job. Sorry, this isn’t plausible at all if she has kids. The whole thing sounds made up as is.

Your privilege is showing.

Do you really have no awareness of how many people in this country work two full-time jobs? Or how many families need multiple incomes in order to make ends meet?

A childless teacher doesn’t need two full time jobs, sorry. Most teachers with children do not have a second full time job as their main teaching job takes all their time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t have a clue what someone has going on in their lives and assuming that someone with no kids has more free time than someone without kids is ridiculous. People coach, have second jobs, could be caring for other family members. This is not a fair assumption.

But ultimately having kids means you have less free time overall than someone without kids. Get real.

I think you're the one who needs to get real. As others have said, you have no clue what someone has going on in their personal lives.

My former neighbor, a teacher, worked full-time, then went home to care for her husband who was suffering from ALS (they had a daytime CNA). She certainly had zero "free time," probably even less than someone with small children.

My cousin, a teacher, worked a second job from 4pm- 9pm four days per week, plus ten-hour days on both Saturday and Sunday. That's a second full-time job. She had very little "free time."

It doesn't matter, though. It is no one else's business how much "free time" someone has, and anyone even implying that someone without children should be able to do more work than is required, is inappropriate and a violation of their privacy.

If your cousin had kids she would not have the “free time” to take that second job. She is choosing to take a second job in her free time it appears.

Her spouse could take care of the kids during that time. I know two teachers at my school who go to jobs after school until 8pm. Their spouses pick the kids up from after care at 6pm. They aren’t doing this for fun.

The PP said her teacher cousin works 4-9 pm 4 days a week during the week and then 10 hours on Sat and Sun in addition to a full time teaching job. Sorry, this isn’t plausible at all if she has kids. The whole thing sounds made up as is.

Your privilege is showing.

Do you really have no awareness of how many people in this country work two full-time jobs? Or how many families need multiple incomes in order to make ends meet?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t have a clue what someone has going on in their lives and assuming that someone with no kids has more free time than someone without kids is ridiculous. People coach, have second jobs, could be caring for other family members. This is not a fair assumption.

But ultimately having kids means you have less free time overall than someone without kids. Get real.

I think you're the one who needs to get real. As others have said, you have no clue what someone has going on in their personal lives.

My former neighbor, a teacher, worked full-time, then went home to care for her husband who was suffering from ALS (they had a daytime CNA). She certainly had zero "free time," probably even less than someone with small children.

My cousin, a teacher, worked a second job from 4pm- 9pm four days per week, plus ten-hour days on both Saturday and Sunday. That's a second full-time job. She had very little "free time."

It doesn't matter, though. It is no one else's business how much "free time" someone has, and anyone even implying that someone without children should be able to do more work than is required, is inappropriate and a violation of their privacy.

If your cousin had kids she would not have the “free time” to take that second job. She is choosing to take a second job in her free time it appears.

Her spouse could take care of the kids during that time. I know two teachers at my school who go to jobs after school until 8pm. Their spouses pick the kids up from after care at 6pm. They aren’t doing this for fun.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t have a clue what someone has going on in their lives and assuming that someone with no kids has more free time than someone without kids is ridiculous. People coach, have second jobs, could be caring for other family members. This is not a fair assumption.

But ultimately having kids means you have less free time overall than someone without kids. Get real.

I think you're the one who needs to get real. As others have said, you have no clue what someone has going on in their personal lives.

My former neighbor, a teacher, worked full-time, then went home to care for her husband who was suffering from ALS (they had a daytime CNA). She certainly had zero "free time," probably even less than someone with small children.

My cousin, a teacher, worked a second job from 4pm- 9pm four days per week, plus ten-hour days on both Saturday and Sunday. That's a second full-time job. She had very little "free time."

It doesn't matter, though. It is no one else's business how much "free time" someone has, and anyone even implying that someone without children should be able to do more work than is required, is inappropriate and a violation of their privacy.

If your cousin had kids she would not have the “free time” to take that second job. She is choosing to take a second job in her free time it appears.

Her spouse could take care of the kids during that time. I know two teachers at my school who go to jobs after school until 8pm. Their spouses pick the kids up from after care at 6pm. They aren’t doing this for fun.

The PP said her teacher cousin works 4-9 pm 4 days a week during the week and then 10 hours on Sat and Sun in addition to a full time teaching job. Sorry, this isn’t plausible at all if she has kids. The whole thing sounds made up as is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dear teachers, in case you didn't know, students talk amongst themselves. So when the highest grade in an non-honors class is a B- and majority of the class are Cs and Ds, maybe question if there is anything wrong with the way you teach.

Dear parents:
Stop coddling your children. Stop telling them that if they get bad grades, it must be the teacher's fault. Help them build the character they will need to work hard and be successful, not be whiny, lazy and living in your basement when they're 35.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t have a clue what someone has going on in their lives and assuming that someone with no kids has more free time than someone without kids is ridiculous. People coach, have second jobs, could be caring for other family members. This is not a fair assumption.

But ultimately having kids means you have less free time overall than someone without kids. Get real.

I think you're the one who needs to get real. As others have said, you have no clue what someone has going on in their personal lives.

My former neighbor, a teacher, worked full-time, then went home to care for her husband who was suffering from ALS (they had a daytime CNA). She certainly had zero "free time," probably even less than someone with small children.

My cousin, a teacher, worked a second job from 4pm- 9pm four days per week, plus ten-hour days on both Saturday and Sunday. That's a second full-time job. She had very little "free time."

It doesn't matter, though. It is no one else's business how much "free time" someone has, and anyone even implying that someone without children should be able to do more work than is required, is inappropriate and a violation of their privacy.

Take a breath. I’m not implying someone without children should have to do more work. I’m simply explaining why some teachers without children may have more free time. People without children always have more free time in general than people with children. You’d know that if you actually have children.

I am not saying anything about what teachers are expected to do. I’m simply stating facts about having kids vs not having kids. Once you have kids, you realize how much more free time you actually had before kids.

I do have children-- two in high school, one in middle school, one in elementary school, and one starting school next year-- so I am aware of how much free time people with children have. I still stand by what I said above.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t have a clue what someone has going on in their lives and assuming that someone with no kids has more free time than someone without kids is ridiculous. People coach, have second jobs, could be caring for other family members. This is not a fair assumption.

But ultimately having kids means you have less free time overall than someone without kids. Get real.

I think you're the one who needs to get real. As others have said, you have no clue what someone has going on in their personal lives.

My former neighbor, a teacher, worked full-time, then went home to care for her husband who was suffering from ALS (they had a daytime CNA). She certainly had zero "free time," probably even less than someone with small children.

My cousin, a teacher, worked a second job from 4pm- 9pm four days per week, plus ten-hour days on both Saturday and Sunday. That's a second full-time job. She had very little "free time."

It doesn't matter, though. It is no one else's business how much "free time" someone has, and anyone even implying that someone without children should be able to do more work than is required, is inappropriate and a violation of their privacy.

If your cousin had kids she would not have the “free time” to take that second job. She is choosing to take a second job in her free time it appears.

Her spouse could take care of the kids during that time. I know two teachers at my school who go to jobs after school until 8pm. Their spouses pick the kids up from after care at 6pm. They aren’t doing this for fun.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t have a clue what someone has going on in their lives and assuming that someone with no kids has more free time than someone without kids is ridiculous. People coach, have second jobs, could be caring for other family members. This is not a fair assumption.

But ultimately having kids means you have less free time overall than someone without kids. Get real.

I think you're the one who needs to get real. As others have said, you have no clue what someone has going on in their personal lives.

My former neighbor, a teacher, worked full-time, then went home to care for her husband who was suffering from ALS (they had a daytime CNA). She certainly had zero "free time," probably even less than someone with small children.

My cousin, a teacher, worked a second job from 4pm- 9pm four days per week, plus ten-hour days on both Saturday and Sunday. That's a second full-time job. She had very little "free time."

It doesn't matter, though. It is no one else's business how much "free time" someone has, and anyone even implying that someone without children should be able to do more work than is required, is inappropriate and a violation of their privacy.

If your cousin had kids she would not have the “free time” to take that second job. She is choosing to take a second job in her free time it appears.

Her spouse could take care of the kids during that time. I know two teachers at my school who go to jobs after school until 8pm. Their spouses pick the kids up from after care at 6pm. They aren’t doing this for fun.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t have a clue what someone has going on in their lives and assuming that someone with no kids has more free time than someone without kids is ridiculous. People coach, have second jobs, could be caring for other family members. This is not a fair assumption.

But ultimately having kids means you have less free time overall than someone without kids. Get real.

I think you're the one who needs to get real. As others have said, you have no clue what someone has going on in their personal lives.

My former neighbor, a teacher, worked full-time, then went home to care for her husband who was suffering from ALS (they had a daytime CNA). She certainly had zero "free time," probably even less than someone with small children.

My cousin, a teacher, worked a second job from 4pm- 9pm four days per week, plus ten-hour days on both Saturday and Sunday. That's a second full-time job. She had very little "free time."

It doesn't matter, though. It is no one else's business how much "free time" someone has, and anyone even implying that someone without children should be able to do more work than is required, is inappropriate and a violation of their privacy.

If your cousin had kids she would not have the “free time” to take that second job. She is choosing to take a second job in her free time it appears.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t have a clue what someone has going on in their lives and assuming that someone with no kids has more free time than someone without kids is ridiculous. People coach, have second jobs, could be caring for other family members. This is not a fair assumption.

But ultimately having kids means you have less free time overall than someone without kids. Get real.

I think you're the one who needs to get real. As others have said, you have no clue what someone has going on in their personal lives.

My former neighbor, a teacher, worked full-time, then went home to care for her husband who was suffering from ALS (they had a daytime CNA). She certainly had zero "free time," probably even less than someone with small children.

My cousin, a teacher, worked a second job from 4pm- 9pm four days per week, plus ten-hour days on both Saturday and Sunday. That's a second full-time job. She had very little "free time."

It doesn't matter, though. It is no one else's business how much "free time" someone has, and anyone even implying that someone without children should be able to do more work than is required, is inappropriate and a violation of their privacy.

Take a breath. I’m not implying someone without children should have to do more work. I’m simply explaining why some teachers without children may have more free time. People without children always have more free time in general than people with children. You’d know that if you actually have children.

I am not saying anything about what teachers are expected to do. I’m simply stating facts about having kids vs not having kids. Once you have kids, you realize how much more free time you actually had before kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t have a clue what someone has going on in their lives and assuming that someone with no kids has more free time than someone without kids is ridiculous. People coach, have second jobs, could be caring for other family members. This is not a fair assumption.

But ultimately having kids means you have less free time overall than someone without kids. Get real.

I think you're the one who needs to get real. As others have said, you have no clue what someone has going on in their personal lives.

My former neighbor, a teacher, worked full-time, then went home to care for her husband who was suffering from ALS (they had a daytime CNA). She certainly had zero "free time," probably even less than someone with small children.

My cousin, a teacher, worked a second job from 4pm- 9pm four days per week, plus ten-hour days on both Saturday and Sunday. That's a second full-time job. She had very little "free time."

It doesn't matter, though. It is no one else's business how much "free time" someone has, and anyone even implying that someone without children should be able to do more work than is required, is inappropriate and a violation of their privacy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don’t have a clue what someone has going on in their lives and assuming that someone with no kids has more free time than someone without kids is ridiculous. People coach, have second jobs, could be caring for other family members. This is not a fair assumption.

But ultimately having kids means you have less free time overall than someone without kids. Get real.

I think you're the one who needs to get real. As others have said, you have no clue what someone has going on in their personal lives.

My former neighbor, a teacher, worked full-time, then went home to care for her husband who was suffering from ALS (they had a daytime CNA). She certainly had zero "free time," probably even less than someone with small children.

My cousin, a teacher, worked a second job from 4pm- 9pm four days per week, plus ten-hour days on both Saturday and Sunday. That's a second full-time job. She had very little "free time."

It doesn't matter, though. It is no one else's business how much "free time" someone has, and anyone even implying that someone without children should be able to do more work than is required, is inappropriate and a violation of their privacy.