View threadsters judging Michelle Obama for having kids plus a legal career and being actively involved in her husband's state and federal Senate and Presidential campaigns:
That is who they're talking about, right? I mean they did think about this issue when thinking about the Obama's, right? I'm sure they did. Michelle Obama can't possibly be an adequate Mom and pursue a career, much less a high-paying legal career, not to mention her involvement in her husband's demanding political campaigns!
Not bull crap. I think women should be raising their kids. I take the choice to bring a child into the world seriously. A ball of cells means nothing to me, but a born child means a lot- and if you choose to have one you should, imo, raise it. Clearly you can think that's crap if you want to- but what I think is crap is having a kid and then acting like it's a puppy, and you can give it to anyone to raise. That, imo, is crap. I realize neither the liberals nor the conservatives value real motherhood anymore- but again, devaluing staying home and raising children is real crap. It is, imo, a mother's job to bond with her baby and nourish it and raise it if she has the ability to do it. I know it isn't the lifestyle choice even for people who can afford it, but again, that's crap.
...................
Ah, and I see I get discussed by you elsewhere- well no wonder you had to creep on over here. Let me tell you, I gave up the law to raise my children, and I gave up a large salary to do it, and I'm 100% glad I did. I have a special needs boy- and I took him to doctors, and to therapy sometimes on a daily basis (for years), and to special playgroups to get him over his disability (for years). And when there was a physical therapist starting a playgroup my kid was first on the list- and guess what? The kid they said at 3 would be institutionalized, and who they said in 2nd grade should never be put in regular ed, and who they said might never master middle school math, is off the charts on the high school tests- 100% in several areas of the STAR test- and a great student now in regular education in high school. So when you talk about me, make sure you get it right. I have been the best MOTHER to my children, and I have done far more than almost anyone else I know. I have been an advocate in a way most parents never need to be, and I have changed careers to support my children. So when you talk about guilt and inadequacy may I suggest you turn your personal insults on someone to whom they might apply, because I am freaking MOTHER of the century. Not that you'd care, but you really ought to know how absolutely positively freaking wrong you are.
So when I see someone with a disabled child seeking to run the country rather than MOTHER her child I have a personal reaction to that- and a negative personal reaction, because I've been there, for years and years, I've been there. Of course you wouldn't have known that- even though you felt confident enough to comment on my life.
I'm amazed by your personal venom- to someone not a public figure who you do not know and who has never commented on your life and who has no interest in it. I do not give a crap about what kind of parent you are, or if you are one. and if you don't care about the truth of what kind of parent I am, it would be nice if you could just shut up- but alas, probably not possible.
Message 24894596
It is judgmental- anyone with a sense of right and wrong should be judgmental. That's the whole point in believing in something- you make judgments on your beliefs- but I don't want laws forcing my judgments on others- in fact, I don't even want society forcing my judgments on other without laws- I just want to be able to speak my peace on what I think is right and what is wrong. We made large sacrifices so I could stay home. We weren't "elitist" when I was buying my kids clothes and toys at garage sales. We weren't elitist taking no family trips, and keeping our old cars. We were actually sacrificing- so our kids could have what we believed was good for them. I think any woman who has a child and then drops it off right after it is born, when she does not NEED to, simply because she wants a bigger house, or a newer car, or more things, or a better career- is wrong. That's a judgment I am happy to make.
Look at you- judging me to be an elitist So you are judgmental too, aren't you? And that's fine- it's just sort of silly to cry to me about it, when you are too. Don't you think?
You don't have to agree- and you are plenty judgmental about other things- including me personally, so I wouldn't say you have a leg to stand on there. But you go ahead, tell me how tolerant (and full of humility) you are...
...
I take your point about the attitude, but Mme is correct in her original assertion that you short either the family or the career if you try to do both.
I chose the career. There is no way I could have been an adequate mom concurrently let alone give kids what they deserve. The demands of a career are just too great. With a part time job as a checker in a supermarket you could probably give adequate energy to kids but not have a serious career, not unless you have a nanny or equivalent support from family, which is often possible with a successful enough career. The alternative is to have the career or the kids first, then do the other. But concurrently, I don't see how you can give proper attention to both.
siliconinvestor.com |
