• November 1, 2014
November 01, 2014, 8:02:42 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with your Chronicle username and password
News: For all you tweeters, follow The Chronicle on Twitter.
 
Pages: [1] 2 3
  Print  
Author Topic: More than Two Children  (Read 10271 times)
gekko
Senior member
****
Posts: 637


« on: July 13, 2009, 6:04:30 AM »

I just had to comment on the recent thread on the jobs homepage regarding how those with more than two children fear they are perceived.

Let me be about as blunt as possible: If your primary goal in life is to catch up with the octomom, you are definitely perceived in a different light, and for good reason.

This is not a civil rights issue guys. Choosing to pop out a unit every two or three years is not the same as being black or gay. This is a personal decision, and certainly your decision alone to make, although to act as if those who have a legitimate disdain for your choices are "unenlightened" or bigoted in some way is a level of righteous indignation approaching absurdity.

Many individuals including myself believe that having excessive children (generally more than two) is detrimental not only to the children themselves but society at large from an environmental, population containment, and economic standpoint. All of these issues come before the more important aspect that your ability to raise a large number of children is questionable, usually resulting in government subsidy. (In the very least in the form of additional tax exemptions per child.)

You are entitled to disability leave during your pregnancy and for whatever period of time afterward your state allows. You should not expect a pat on the back from me or any other individuals who may be expected to handle tasks you have chosen to abandon. You should also not expect any lack of activity that may have resulted from your breeding schedule to be considered on par with the accomplishments of those who have not chosen to divert from their career activities. If you're still knocking out the work regardless then great, it's a non-issue.

This is also not a discussion about women's rights. I don't applaud when a male rapper or basketball player impregnates an auditorium of women. Eazy-E had 9 children. Have you ever heard anyone say this was a good idea? If the irresponsible behavior of a man were as visually apparent, it would receive greater comment as well.

Let me make one request of anyone who wants to flame my post. Are you defending any amount of breeding? Is there no point at which it is excessive? Five, ten, twenty children?
Logged
bacardiandlime
Ninja
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 3,444

That makes me more gangster than you


WWW
« Reply #1 on: July 13, 2009, 6:17:00 AM »

There is already a thread in the 'discuss Chronicle Articles' section:
http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php/topic,61523.0.html

If you are talking about something else, please provide a link. "The recent thread on the jobs homepage" is far too vague for me to waste my time clicking around to find it.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 6:18:45 AM by bacardiandlime » Logged

gekko
Senior member
****
Posts: 637


« Reply #2 on: July 13, 2009, 6:53:16 AM »

I'm referring to this article:

http://chronicle.com/free/v55/i41/41b01601.htm

Logged
bacardiandlime
Ninja
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 3,444

That makes me more gangster than you


WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 13, 2009, 7:08:28 AM »

That's an article, not a thread.

I sympathise with your points to the extent that I don't appreciate people expecting workplace credit for the fact that they have children, or see their parenthood as some kind of job qualification. I resent the assumption that just because I'm female I'll be in favour of generous maternity leave and childcare benefits: I don't have kids, so I would like to get a cash bonus instead of those 'benefits' that I won't use.

But if people want to have 2, 4, 7 children: that's none of my business.
Logged

kedves
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 6,756


« Reply #4 on: July 13, 2009, 9:20:17 AM »

It is unusual to see an argument made by an article's writer so splendidly confirmed by a post about it.
Logged
macaroon
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 6,410

__/\__\0/__ Look out! Sharks!


« Reply #5 on: July 13, 2009, 9:39:15 AM »

Many individuals including myself believe that having excessive children (generally more than two) is detrimental not only to the children themselves but society at large from an environmental, population containment, and economic standpoint.

Just curious....  ARE YOU AN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST?  I have professional interactions with folks whose research interests involve environmental sustainability and population modeling.  I have NEVER EVER EVER not one time heard one of my sustainability colleagues talk about "environmental responsibility" regarding childbearing in the United States.  I have, however, heard this argument from english and music faculty whose research interests have absolutely nothing to do with environmental science.  From my colleagues who actually study this stuff, I've heard that in the US, the number of children you have doesn't make much of a difference in terms of environmental impact.  From them, I hear that what makes a difference is how far you live from work, and how big a home you are trying to heat.  The only person who says otherwise (Paul Ehrlich) has, I'm told, been doing "bad" science for decades. 

Logged
daurousseau
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 4,909


« Reply #6 on: July 13, 2009, 9:43:01 AM »

There was an old lady who lived in a shoe. She had so many children, i.e. more than two.
Logged
humgrad
New member
*
Posts: 7


« Reply #7 on: July 13, 2009, 9:44:03 AM »

Gekko's comments are beyond astonishing.  Do you hate the idea of children?  You refer to having a child as "pop[ping] out a unit" and to starting a family as "breeding."  This is insulting to everyone with children and involved in the beautiful process of raising a family.  

Kedves is right, "It is unusual to see an argument made by an article's writer so splendidly confirmed by a post about it."  
Logged
inthelab
Where beloved molecules abide
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 4,240

Who knew?


WWW
« Reply #8 on: July 13, 2009, 9:57:09 AM »

All I care about in terms of this thread is that women with >2 children are treated the same as men with >2 children, in terms of pay, promotions, tenure.  Childbearing is something that keeps society going; how many children in a family there are is a private matter. 
Logged

tenured_feminist
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 9,568


« Reply #9 on: July 13, 2009, 11:24:00 AM »

Gekko, I strongly recommend keeping that 'tude under wraps until you're at the point of seniority in your career when you no longer risk getting reviewed by more senior people like me who have more than two kids.
Logged

Quote
You people are not fooling me. I know exactly what occurred in that thread, and I know exactly what you all are doing.
bacardiandlime
Ninja
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 3,444

That makes me more gangster than you


WWW
« Reply #10 on: July 13, 2009, 11:48:21 AM »

T_F: gekko is not an academic. He left academia (after completing an MFA) for some high-paying finance job. So I'm not sure why he's posting here at all.
Logged

larryc
Troll Proof
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 23,004

Be excellent to each other.


WWW
« Reply #11 on: July 13, 2009, 1:19:16 PM »

Trolls have small broods with fewer offspring than we humans.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 1:20:34 PM by larryc » Logged

Trolling for sex is not what this forum is all about.
fizmath
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 2,159


« Reply #12 on: July 13, 2009, 7:30:24 PM »

Gekko, should Stephen Colbert's parents have stopped at kid number 2?  What about JS Bach?

Why don't you view humans as a resource instead of a carbon footprint?
Logged
moonstone
Junior member
**
Posts: 67


« Reply #13 on: July 14, 2009, 5:30:59 PM »

Gekko's comments are beyond astonishing.  Do you hate the idea of children?  You refer to having a child as "pop[ping] out a unit" and to starting a family as "breeding."  This is insulting to everyone with children and involved in the beautiful process of raising a family.  

Kedves is right, "It is unusual to see an argument made by an article's writer so splendidly confirmed by a post about it."  
I take it you have not heared the rhetoric of those childfree folks who are also child haters? Sick people they are. I suggest you check this like out before getting upset about any such rubbish. http://www.refugees.bratfree.com/list.php?2
Same vocabulary.
Logged
inthelab
Where beloved molecules abide
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 4,240

Who knew?


WWW
« Reply #14 on: July 15, 2009, 8:23:48 AM »

Gekko's comments are beyond astonishing.  Do you hate the idea of children?  You refer to having a child as "pop[ping] out a unit" and to starting a family as "breeding."  This is insulting to everyone with children and involved in the beautiful process of raising a family.  

Kedves is right, "It is unusual to see an argument made by an article's writer so splendidly confirmed by a post about it."  
I take it you have not heared the rhetoric of those childfree folks who are also child haters? Sick people they are. I suggest you check this like out before getting upset about any such rubbish. http://www.refugees.bratfree.com/list.php?2
Same vocabulary.
The NY Times magazine had an article about the "child-free by choice" movement a while back.  Sick indeed.
http://www.raleighnokidding.com/articles/nytimes700.html
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 3
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.9 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
  • 1255 Twenty-Third St., N.W.
  • Washington, D.C. 20037
subscribe today

Get the insight you need for success in academe.