Drea

True. Perhaps as the next generation reaches their 40's and 50's things will be a tad more equal in that regard. Sales is actually a very emotional business. People may think they are buying based on logic, but they buy based on emotion. Women are better at reading emotions than men (generalization!) so it stands to reason they are better sales reps.

Heck no, not me. Some gorgeous young woman you fall in love with might tho. As I've said before, I didn't want kids when I was in my 20's. Thankfully I got pregnant and got to experience the whole difficult, incredible, rewarding experience. Never say never Jer.

What do you mean by "whatever floats your boat"? I never once said it was beautiful -- there's friggin blood and sweat everywhere -- ick! How old are you Jer?

It aint all roses Jer. Ever been up with a baby who cried for six months straight? Or the 2 year old who has a "fit" in the grocery store? Ever work really hard at a difficult job, finally get to the end of it, and feel a huge sense of accomplishment? Even though it was really taxing and you didn't think you'd get through it? That's what it's about.

Do you have any children Jerry? My son's father did not wait out in the waiting room. He came in there with me when I gave birth and he cried like a baby when he saw his son. My brother was there for the birth of his first child. He too cried at the amazement of it. If you don't have kids yet, when you do, go in with her. It's something you shouldn't miss. Ok, monthly cycles really suck. But some things (children) are worth it. I got back to my "size" within 1 year so no problemo there. Breast feeding (although I didn't for reasons I won't go into here) is also incredibly amazing. It's amazing that a woman's body can nurture and sustain another human being. Those who did breastfeed say it's the best, being so close and bonding with your baby.

There's your trouble. ... Christian nation ... Muslim nation ... Buddist nation ... Secular nation What difference does it make? The United States of America has ALREADY demonstrated that it WILL use nuclear weapons against another nation. Who's the bad guy? The guy that MIGHT one day use nukes? Or the guy that HAS used them in the past? Who's the bad guy? The guy that MIGHT use his gun one day to kill someone? Or the guy who HAS used his gun to kill others in the past?

Yes it's an absolute unbelievable feeling to carry a baby. It's an absolute unbelievable feeling to give birth to a tiny human being. It's utterly amazing -- makes me very very glad to be a woman. Although I was never planning on having children -- I am sooo glad that I did. If men could experience this wonder -- I think our world would be a much different (kinder) place. There is nothing like the love between a mother and child.

Uh, somebody already won the race guys -- the U.S.A. or perhaps the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is just another tin foil hat conspiracy theory.

I work in sales and I am a woman... sales is unstable, not rules-based, not activity focussed, non-conformist, non-bureaucratic culture. Perfect for most women. It was only a few years ago that a woman could be a nurse, a teacher or a mom. (say 1970). Even in the 1980's when I was a young woman, we were encouraged to take "foods" and "sewing". No young girls took shop or metalwork. Today there is much less pigeonholing of roles. And that is a good thing. Most girls excel at reading -- my son reads and spells just like a girl - he's great at math too, but not as good as he is in english (literacy). Most boys play sports, my son could care less about sports. The point is all people are unique and different, even between the genders. BTW, we (hubby and I) are our own stock brokers. (Dying breed that is) We simply do our trading over the internet.

Had the couple had agreed in the beginning that she would stay home and her "career" would entail being a wife and mother? Why does he all of a sudden need her to get a job? Did his career take a downturn? Is he earning less than before? If all was okay when the kids were little, why is it necessary for her to take a job now? So many questions LOL.

Have you considered a career as a bureaucrat? You'd be great at allthose feel good government funded sessions about BS politically correct anti-stereotyping. Brokerage firms are meritocracies. Women aren't as successful in them as men. Get over it. All the brokers I know are women. Our mortgage broker is a woman. The person that deals with our RRSP's is a woman. The manager of the bank we deal with is a woman... Just look in the latest copy of a real estate newspaper (mortgage brokers advertise there) and see how many are women. I can't believe in 2006, people still believe women and men should be pigeon-holed into careers based on what's between their legs. It's 2006, men and women are equal. Get over it. BTW, I know lots of women with "balls". and it has nothing to do with what's between their legs!

and, they have reasonable custody and access arrangements. Yes, and that too. If all a woman ever wanted to do is be a mom and wife (and she meets a man who agrees with this decision) then she puts her entire life in the hands of her husband. She is completely dependent and so yes, in this case, she should recieve the maximum allowable alimony. After all by agreeing to her being a mom and wife he is saying he will support her for life. For the woman who is in the middle of a career then decides to stay home, the onus is on her to resume her career. Depends on if she is like the woman in the example above and has no plans of a career of her own, or if she plans on a career. If she needs to go to school to get her career and she has waited while he went, but doesn't get to go because he leaves... then yes, he should be responsible for paying at least a portion of her training costs.

There is a case in the US where a woman kept a man's sperm after oral sex and later impregnated herself with it. The man was forced to pay child support by the courts. In that case the man never consented to any activity which carried a risk of pregnancy yet he was forced to pay anyways. This case illustrates the absurdity of the law as it stands today. That really made me laugh! Poor s.o.b. -- guess yah gotta be careful where yah deposit yer sperm. "Hey bitch, you were supposed to swallow!" sorry, it's not funny but I can't help it. It's only recently that fathers have had to pay any support at all. There are going to be a few that "fall through the cracks" so-to-speak, but for the most part child support is fair to both parties. Of course we are going to hear horror stories of men paying exhorbitant amounts, and women who never recieve a cent. Most fathers are glad to pay support for their children as long as it's fair. I used to not believe in alimony, but lately I've changed that thinking. If a woman sacrifices her career to have children (stays home) and then the couple split later, he should have to pay because she does not have the earning capacity to maintain a household. (This is another good reason to keep your careers ladies).

Yes, for those who can afford it. I am all for private health care. The issue they have in the states is not the level of care, but access to it. In the USA if your private insurance provider (if you have one) says you're covered then you are ok. But what if the private insurance provider deems your health issue one that is not covered? What then? I am in no way saying our care is better -- it's not. Our care (such as it is, such as it needs improvement) does cover every citizen, not just those who pay a private insurance company. Bring in private health care to Canada -- but keep private insurers (HMOs -- Human Monster Organizations) from taking over the public insurance system.

Just put them in jail in the general population (child sex offenders are usually put in "protective custody") where the inmates will take good care of them (Kill the bastards!)

In BC, a while back, Gordon Campbell was going to put a three year limit on welfare wherein a single parent could only stay on welfare until the youngest child was 3yo. I know my tenant was forced to go back to school -- she took ECE and has that small daycare now. Although she is not completely independent of govt assistance, she is less dependent than before she took the training. As welfare is a provincial responsibility, I expect it will be different in all the provinces. I am all for forced training. No one should be allowed to sit on welfare for life (except the mentally handicapped or the unemployable ie; seniors or those too ill to work).

"We" being who? I had a buddy that got a $5,000 rescue bill for getting pulled of a mountain, which I admit was a 'irresponsible choice' in a 'high risk' situation. Which is kind of like having unprotected sex with an uncommitted partner just for the thrill of it?? Smokers should be last on the list for transplants in my opinion, and I'd even consider having them pay their own way in treatment, same with alcoholics and drug addicts. No need for you or I to pay for someone else's stupidity. What about overweight people? They are high risk to the medical establishment. Not all unplanned pregnancies are a result of unprotected sex. No contraceptive is 100% effective. My tenant that got pregnant the second time -- she was on the birth control patch. My brother was dating this woman... she got pregnant and now he pays her $500 a month for his daughter whom he NEVER sees! That BITCH! He didn't even know she was pregnant until she showed up with a one year old! They only dated for a very short time. The one good thing is she lets my father (the little girl's granddad) visit. She is cute as a button (she's 5) and we all would love to get to know her better. My bro is getting married this summer (to an awesome woman) and they are going to fight for custody. In June I take my son to see his biological father. We try to get up north to see him at least once a year. I firmly believe that removing the father from the child's life is always detrimental, unless the father is a drug addict or abusive.

Was not meant to imply such. Means that without the "hand up" from the govt, perhaps I would not be a taxpayer at all. Now that the gov't hepled me (for about 9 months) I have, once again, become a productive member of society. Thanks govt! for being there when I really needed you and for helping me when I was low income. Also untrue. And by the way. I did have to pay back $2600 which was the "living expense" portion of the welfare I collected for 9 months. They are sooo generous, they didn't make me pay back the "shelter" portion. As I was not deemed "unemployable" (I have a college education) as soon as I got a job I had to pay back that portion of what welfare gave me (not the daycare subsidy tho -- thank goodness). They called it "hardship" not "welfare". You know what's wonky? If I would have stayed on welfare longer, I would not have had to pay it back. Later in life (2002), I was on EI and wanted to change careers (or thought I did). The federal gov't paid me my EI while I went back to college. Hand Up or Hand Out? I didn't change careers, I went back to sales, but now I have updated computer skills which are invaluable in the position I now hold. I agree though, I am one of the fortunate ones. I didn't go into this totally uneducated like most who wind up on welfare. I had a college education and years of experience behind me. Last night I was thinking about my little boy when he was about 2 and how hard it was to drop him off at daycare. How badly I just wanted to stay home with him. But I did not want to raise a child on welfare. I did not want to teach him that welfare was an option in life.

I so agree. Kids need their dad (or a very good step-dad).

As long as we are all happy. If you are happy staying at home. I'm happy for you. I'm a very fortunate woman to have a wonderful man who supports my career. The further up the ladder I climb, the better off our family will be. As soon as I make enough to fully support the family, hubby will quit his job and open his own business. THEN I'll be the one cooking as he'll be pretty darn busy.

So mom works and has the rest of the working family waiting on her hand and foot. Perfect feminisim!! Whoever gets home first cooks. Just so happens I work til 5, hubby works til 3:30 when on days. When he's on nights I cook. On Tuesdays when both my men go to cadets, I cook and do the dishes. I cook and do the dishes on the weekends Wassa matter? Jealous? It's not 'feminism' darlin' -- it's r-e-a-l-i-t-y. In my family no one is waited on... we all do our share.

Thanks Jerry. But then you say: The woman has the bulk of the responsibility, financial and emotional. The man certainly does not pay 50% of the real cost of raising a child. My ex pays $350 for one of his kids. Does this mean it costs only $700 a month to raise the child? Apparently daycare alone costs $750 per month. Double what my ex pays. LOL When my ex was with the young one (and he already had the first 3 kids) I said "Watch out -- she's young, she's gonna want a baby". "oh no, she's not like that, she's on the pill" he said. They split up and sure enough, she was pregnant. In my case -- the condom fell off -- they do that (fall off) you know. No one's fault -- not my fault, not his fault. Every now and then he gets really po'd about having to pay me the $100, but then later apologizes when he thinks about the fact that I had the judge lower his support payments. BTW, he got a vasectomy

You make arrangements. Not cry to the government for handouts. Y'know...if you're into having someone else raising your kids 24/7. I don't know about you, but if my boss made me work 24/7 I'd not be a happy employee. Maybe you oughta talk to your boss about maybe a workshare program so that you don't have to work all day and all night. I was low income when my son was in primary school. The govt provided me with money for after school care. Once again, I NOW pay more in taxes than I collected on welfare... IF the govt had NOT provided childcare monies I WOULD NOT be where I am today -- I would either be working in a low-level, low-paying job or have no job at all. I'm sorry I'm going "all caps" on yer butts, but I'm tired of people saying low income people CRY for a handout. Its not a hand OUT its a hand UP. A hand OUT is giving $100 a month to the family who doesn't need it.

Licensing agencies have no problems about home providers living in highrise buildings. As long as the careprovider takes them out...usually to a park or a long walk. Why does it have to be a DETACHED house btw??? Rowhouses or semi-detached homes have their own yards, right? I know careproviders with government agencies operating from such types of houses, so it can't be a regulation. Talk about "nit picking" sheesh! Sure, she can send the kids out to play on a postage stamp -- the kids can run in really tight circles LOL. Who cares. She probably (as a loooooong term tenant) pays less rent for her "detached" home than she would for a studio apartment the way the rental markets gone these days. Friends of mine pay $850 for their house (OMG a detached home!). Others on the same street, in the same type of house pay $1100+. Why is their rent so low -- loooooong term tenants.