Staying at Home "On Welfare" - Page 21 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#601 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 12:51 AM
 
2bluefish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,638
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
No. You are judging people's LIVES.
There we go - exactly what has bothered me this whole time - I have been completely misunderstood. I am not judging people's lives. I am not saying my life is more valid, important, moral than somebody else's. I am not. That is a complete and utter mischaracterization of my viewpoint.

I have only judged that *one choice* is not the choice I would deem best overall. I believe the majority of women in the US would be better off having their babies at home - possibly unassisted. That does not mean I judge hospital birthers or their lives. Only that I have an opinion about a choice they have made (and my opinion has not changed after joining their ranks).

Choices are judgement calls. And we don't have to tolerate or support all the judgement calls of others - if we do, we are failing miserably here at MDC.
2bluefish is offline  
#602 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 12:52 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So then, where is the thread where you make the same statements about mothers who don't UC as those who get welfare? Since the level of judgment is the same for both and all.
thismama is offline  
#603 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 01:03 AM
 
2bluefish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,638
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You would need to hang around the UC forum here - or elsewhere on the internet. UCers have always been known for being pretty vocal about their beliefs.

You could also go over to GD and listen to the mamas talk about spankers and how abusive they are.

Or the circ forum where we hear about how circ is genital mutilation.

Or Pets to read about how I'm neglecting my dog.

Are we judging the lives of all those people? Or just the choices? It seems to me if we decide these discussion are about judging other's lives, we are going to have to shut up and make the forum support only. :
2bluefish is offline  
#604 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 01:07 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bluefish View Post
Are we judging the lives of all those people? Or just the choices? It seems to me if we decide these discussion are about judging other's lives, we are going to have to shut up and make the forum support only. :
Choices can be a big part of our lives. They can become inflicted identities, as in the "welfare mama" stigma. So when you not having walked in my shoes, judge my choices and make some of the comments you have on this issue, well yeah I'm gonna probably get offended.

I am not saying we have to make everything support only. But when you bring out the big guns on such a personal subject, prepare to hear back with equal force. Kwim? And then you can't very well get upset about having your judgment of others... judged. That's how it goes when you participate in these discussions, especially in the way you have with this one.

That is what I am saying.
thismama is offline  
#605 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 01:28 AM
 
2bluefish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,638
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
So when you not having walked in my shoes, judge my choices and make some of the comments you have on this issue, well yeah I'm gonna probably get offended.
Yes, I find it pretty hurtful to be told I'm neglecting my dog, or I'm irresponsible for UCing. But I also get pretty offended when I have had life experiences in reference to the welfare question that influenced choices I made - not just my judgements - and then my experiences are judged as not significant and my choices judged as having no influence in my life. It is equally insulting.

DH and my 12 combined years of schooling that we got without any help from the gov't, that we worked hard for - to be at the top of our class - so we could have the degree of finacial stability that allows me to stay home cannot be simply dismissed as "priviledge". The person who makes that statement has judged *my life* - labeled me. The offense is equal.

Yeah, when something that defines you is disparaged, it hurts - alot.
2bluefish is offline  
#606 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 01:33 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bluefish View Post
Yes, I find it pretty hurtful to be told I'm neglecting my dog, or I'm irresponsible for UCing.
Yes I can see why!

Quote:
But I also get pretty offended when I have had life experiences in reference to the welfare question that influenced choices I made - not just my judgements - and then my experiences are judged as not significant and my choices judged as having no influence in my life. It is equally insulting.


DH and my 12 combined years of schooling that we got without any help from the gov't, that we worked hard for - to be at the top of our class - so we could have the degree of finacial stability that allows me to stay home cannot be simply dismissed as "priviledge". The person who makes that statement has judged *my life* - labeled me. The offense is equal.

Yeah, when something that defines you is disparaged, it hurts - alot.
Well, I disagree. I think you are doing that thing of "I worked so hard, that is why I didn't get wellie. And you can too!"

I think that fails to acknowledge your privilege, privilege that in this system happens on the backs of the underclass. We all have it, to varying degrees. Yours, combined with your hard work etc etc kept you off the dole.

Not so for everyone.

And now we have come full circle on this discussion.
thismama is offline  
#607 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 02:09 AM
 
2bluefish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,638
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
Well, I disagree. I think you are doing that thing of "I worked so hard, that is why I didn't get wellie. And you can too!"
Actually, I didn't say "And you can too!" I have no idea if hard work would get you anywhere with the situation you are in.

But I do feel hard work more than privilage *in my own case* has more to do with why I am not on welfare. You know how they do "twin studies"? I kind of have that on this subject - 2 sisters, same public school education, same home life, same level of "giftedness", same level of privilege - different choices, different priorities - *drastically* different results. That's the facts. The logical conclusion is that choices and priorities have alot to do with where *some people* end up financially. Same thing when you compare my parents with their siblings.

So yes, to deny the relevance of my choices to my life is to judge my life in a way that I feel is unfair and does not give "credit to whom credit is due". And it doesn't make me feel very sympathetic to those who cry "no body understands me - we should be more tolerant". If you want me to lend a hand with a smile, then don't spit in my face - ywim? People that feel empowered help others - so why try to rob someone of their empowerment? I mean, if I'm just the product of my privilege, then what can I do to help?

Anyway, sleepy... better get to bed.
2bluefish is offline  
#608 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 02:16 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bluefish View Post
So yes, to deny the relevance of my choices to my life is to judge my life in a way that I feel is unfair and does not give "credit to whom credit is due".
Right. So basically you think it's more your personal good qualities than your privilege that landed you where you are, vs. others landing where they are.

Well, that's a theory all right. Pretty much all I can say about that, that hasn't already been said.


Quote:
And it doesn't make me feel very sympathetic to those who cry "no body understands me - we should be more tolerant". If you want me to lend a hand with a smile, then don't spit in my face - ywim?
And that my friend is an excellent articulation of why we cannot rely on individual people's incredible generosity : , to provide a social safety net for people.

I don't *need* you to lend a hand with a smile. You can frown the day away when you see the taxes taken off your paycheque. It is the very society that is taxing you which allows you that paycheque in the first place. Don't forget that. Or, forget that if you choose, but IMO you will get bitter fast.

People in vulnerable situations do not need to be the direct targets of the very misguided anger of others who think they are where they are at because they are special, not because they are privileged. Which is why Libertarianism is so messed up.
thismama is offline  
#609 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 02:46 AM
 
2bluefish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,638
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Why? You told me I am "not special", that I am the product of privilege not hard work, and that people don't need me to feel good - just to fork over my paycheck. You have reduced me and my life's work to the value of producing a paycheck to contribute to a socialist machine.

You offended me - you don't value me Pot black - kettle black...

I don't see any system working out well if people are not allowed to feel empowered and special. Empowered and special people want others to feel empowered and special and work toward that end. Privileged people prefer to stay privileged (therefore some people cannot be privileged).
2bluefish is offline  
#610 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 02:52 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bluefish View Post
Why? You told me I am "not special", that I am the product of privilege not hard work, and that people don't need me to feel good - just to fork over my paycheck.
Uh, no I haven't.

Quote:
You have reduced me and my life's work to the value of producing a paycheck to contribute to a socialist machine.
For serious? This is a thread about welfare. Dude. I'm not talking about you and your life's work. I'm talking about welfare, privilege and capitalism.

Step back, is my suggestion. You are taking this WAAAY too overdramatically personally.

Quote:
You offended me - you don't value me Pot black - kettle black...
Yeah I know. I'm judging you for judging, and it hurts and makes you cry. We've been over the "pot kettle black blue green" territory I think already however.

Quote:
I don't see any system working out well if people are not allowed to feel empowered and special. Empowered and special people want others to feel empowered and special and work toward that end. Priviledged people prefer to stay priviledged (therefore some people cannot be priviledged).
We all have varying levels of privilege. I am not saying I am not privileged. I am very much so. Privileged to live in a rich country, privileged to not be in the US, thank the Goddess. Privileged to have white skin, to come from an upper class background and so to know the trappings of class privilege and to be able to play that game.

That doesn't mean I'm not spe-shul.

But I'm not more special than the next person who is in more dire straits than me. And you are not necessarily more special and hardworking and smart and yada yada than the next person, just because you are not on the dole.

That's what I'm saying.
thismama is offline  
#611 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 02:52 AM
 
mamamoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 12,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bluefish View Post
Why? You told me I am "not special", that I am the product of privilege not hard work, and that people don't need me to feel good - just to fork over my paycheck. You have reduced me and my life's work to the value of producing a paycheck to contribute to a socialist machine.

You offended me - you don't value me Pot black - kettle black...

I don't see any system working out well if people are not allowed to feel empowered and special. Empowered and special people want others to feel empowered and special and work toward that end. Privileged people prefer to stay privileged (therefore some people cannot be privileged).

A lot of priviledged people don't realize how on earth they could be considered priviledged, a lot of them think they are just special, or worked hard.

Single mama to Alex(13), Maddy(12), Sam(8), Violet(6), and Ruby(3). fly-by-nursing1.gif
mamamoo is offline  
#612 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 02:54 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamamoo View Post
A lot of priviledged people don't realize how on earth they could be considered priviledged, a lot of them think they are just special, or worked hard.
Yep. It's pretty cliched really.

Don't be a spe-chul statistic!!

Ha! Another good potential siggie.
thismama is offline  
#613 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 02:55 AM
 
mamamoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 12,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post

For serious? This is a thread about welfare. Dude. I'm not talking about you and your life's work. I'm talking about welfare, privilege and capitalism.

Step back, is my suggestion. You are taking this WAAAY too overdramatically personally.



Yeah, this is starting to sound somewhat like the reverse discrimination threads I have seen here.

Single mama to Alex(13), Maddy(12), Sam(8), Violet(6), and Ruby(3). fly-by-nursing1.gif
mamamoo is offline  
#614 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 02:56 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I just want to give the disclaimer here that most welfare recipients are not nearly as ungrateful as I.
thismama is offline  
#615 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 02:57 AM
 
mamamoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 12,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
Yep. It's pretty cliched really.

Don't be a spe-chul statistic!!

Ha! Another good potential siggie.

But I love your siggie now.

Single mama to Alex(13), Maddy(12), Sam(8), Violet(6), and Ruby(3). fly-by-nursing1.gif
mamamoo is offline  
#616 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 02:57 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamamoo View Post
But I love your siggie now.
Thanks! Me too. I have it on a button too.

It's a good button.
thismama is offline  
#617 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 02:58 AM
 
lyttlewon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bluefish View Post
Why? You told me I am "not special", that I am the product of privilege not hard work, and that people don't need me to feel good - just to fork over my paycheck. You have reduced me and my life's work to the value of producing a paycheck to contribute to a socialist machine.
Well certainly no one expects anyone to fork over their paycheck. You do get what is left over after taxes after all. Please don't forget that many of the people who collect welfare have contributed their taxes as well as their DP's taxes to this "public" fund. People should be entitled at some point to benefit from their own tax money. I don't mean by paying for road construction either.
lyttlewon is offline  
#618 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 02:59 AM
 
mamamoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 12,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
I just want to give the disclaimer here that most welfare recipients are not nearly as ungrateful as I.


I am actually very grateful that there is a system in place for me to fall back on and use to keep my family unit strong. I feel very priviledged to receive this assistance, and will feel even more so when I can give back to my community some day because I was not forced to go crazy when I had to put my tiny baby in daycare so I could be a cog for society during the most important part of our lives. .

Single mama to Alex(13), Maddy(12), Sam(8), Violet(6), and Ruby(3). fly-by-nursing1.gif
mamamoo is offline  
#619 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 03:00 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by lyttlewon View Post
Well certainly no one expects anyone to fork over their paycheck. You do get what is left over after taxes after all. Please don't forget that many of the people who collect welfare have contributed their taxes as well as their DH's taxes to this "public" fund. People should be entitled at some point to benefit from their own tax money. I don't mean by paying for road construction either.
Yep, really good points.

And, how much of tax dollars go toward social service funding? Isn't it like, 1% or something?

Meanwhile, how much goes to the war machine in the States? And to a lesser but still unfortunate degree, here in Canada as well?

How much goes to 'corporate welfare?'

If you wanna get mad about taxes, there is lots to be mad about. Welfare is NOTHING.
thismama is offline  
#620 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 03:01 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamamoo View Post
and will feel even more so when I can give back to my community some day because I was not forced to go crazy when I had to put my tiny baby in daycare so I could be a cog for society during the most important part of our lives. .
Totally.
thismama is offline  
#621 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 03:02 AM
 
mamamoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 12,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by lyttlewon View Post
Well certainly no one expects anyone to fork over their paycheck. You do get what is left over after taxes after all. Please don't forget that many of the people who collect welfare have contributed their taxes as well as their DP's taxes to this "public" fund. People should be entitled at some point to benefit from their own tax money. I don't mean by paying for road construction either.
Yeah, everyone gets their few bucks that are left over...what is the percentage of someone's check that goes *just* to the welfare system again? I believe it is less than 1% or something...

Single mama to Alex(13), Maddy(12), Sam(8), Violet(6), and Ruby(3). fly-by-nursing1.gif
mamamoo is offline  
#622 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 03:03 AM
 
mamamoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 12,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
Yep, really good points.

And, how much of tax dollars go toward social service funding? Isn't it like, 1% or something?

Meanwhile, how much goes to the war machine in the States? And to a lesser but still unfortunate degree, here in Canada as well?

How much goes to 'corporate welfare?'

If you wanna get mad about taxes, there is lots to be mad about. Welfare is NOTHING.
great minds.

Single mama to Alex(13), Maddy(12), Sam(8), Violet(6), and Ruby(3). fly-by-nursing1.gif
mamamoo is offline  
#623 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 03:04 AM
 
mamamoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 12,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Ok, as much as I love this thread, I have to go knit.

Discussions on welfare are awesome.

Single mama to Alex(13), Maddy(12), Sam(8), Violet(6), and Ruby(3). fly-by-nursing1.gif
mamamoo is offline  
#624 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 03:04 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamamoo View Post
great minds.
Ha! OMG. I've post twinned with three different people on three different threads tonight.

Weirdness! We must all be in sync. Just don't throw off my ovulation!!
thismama is offline  
#625 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 03:05 AM
 
mamamoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 12,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
Ha! OMG. I've post twinned with three different people on three different threads tonight.

Weirdness! We must all be in sync. Just don't throw off my ovulation!!


Shouldn't be a problem...I'm not ovulating! LOL

Single mama to Alex(13), Maddy(12), Sam(8), Violet(6), and Ruby(3). fly-by-nursing1.gif
mamamoo is offline  
#626 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 03:06 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamamoo View Post
Ok, as much as I love this thread, I have to go knit.

Discussions on welfare are awesome.
Happy knitting!

I should go to sleep. After all I have to get up and do... oh yeah... NOTHING tomorrow.

BWAHAHA.

(Kidding! Just kidding!!)
thismama is offline  
#627 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 05:38 AM
 
Lady Lilya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,721
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrennaMama
I have no confusion about the position you hold on whether the women you have spoken of should be ashamed of themselves... It is clear that you (and you are not alone, many share this viewpoint) delineate between those deserving of the gov't assistance programs we all pay into at some point and those not deserving of these programs, based on a some kind of moral score-board. Are you aware of how you sound? I respect the open-forum sharing of opinions, I do. Your opinions (as bolded and highlighted above) are formed by your paradigm. That paradigm is fixed by your perception of a select group of women who seem to be really under your skin because their moral compass is not the same as yours. The fact that you then justify your descriptions by admitting that you don't say these things to their faces, just here, to others who don't know them, makes it all the more unpleasant to witness... If you can see that it wouldn't be good to say things like this to their faces, then maybe your paradigm needs a second look. My family has a few members who'd start a Welfare Queen Lynch Mob if they could, standing on that moral high-ground, handing out judgements, saying, "Look at those losers... look at their children! What monsters." and it makes me sad, because there is just NOT this black/white line between deserving and not deserving. I have even been guilty of looking down at low-income families with whom I've little in common, philosophically, but after being on assistance, and interacting on a different level with many of these same kinds of families... I don't see them the same way anymore.

As for winners versus losers, this is exactly the kind of dogma I was referring to... as if life is a game and the people who play it right will be big ol' winners, and the folks that make the baaad choices are losers...
A) I wasn't justifying that it is OK to say bad things about people behind their backs. I was saying that I have ranted ONCE in my life. I realize I should never have done so because I could spend all eternity paying for it in this thread.

B) I don't say anything to their faces because it would do no good. They know their options. This is the one they choose. This is the one they WANT. Maybe I am a little jealous of people who can take selfishly without shame. It would be nice to have their lifestyle of fun and parties with no worries. But I just don't have it in me to take bread from someone else's mouth when I could bake my own, and some to share.

C) I don't care what someone's income is, or their philosophy, or what they have in common with me. If I judged based on those things, it would be everyone against me, since I have never met a person with exactly my view. I was not talking about a different philosophy. Is there ANY philosophy that says it is OK to neglect children? If I can't, on a forum about mothering, identify a group of individuals who neglect to mother their children and state my concern about it, then where can I?

D) Re: winners
My definition is very inclusive. It contains just about everybody. Just not those who choose to neglect their children out of selfishness. If that is not good enough for you, then oh well.

Quote:
Again, what is it about the bad luck or hard-times thing? Is that really a qualifier? Is there some morality paperwork I missed out on that states that in order to avoid the eye-rolls and downward looks a family has to be humbly meek and truly without to draw on these benefits?
Clear and easy distinction:
Person A makes an effort and fails. Person B realizes from a young age that she doesn't have to make any effort, because the government will give her money for sitting around doing just about nothing, so she doesn't bother. Both claim benefits. Person A could have had more benefits for her family if there weren't so many people like Person B consuming the funding.

As for being "truly without," technically both Person A and Person B are truly without. Person A tried to avoid being in that situation, and it just didn't work out. Person B aimed for that situation as a career path. This is the gist of what I am getting at: they AIMED for this result. I thought public assistance was supposed to be a safety net. Why are so many young women of my generation, the people I grew up with, choosing to climb into the safety net and stay there, without ever having tried to do the trapeeze? As more and more people climb into it, doesn't it become less effective for those who truly fall off the trapeeze? Doesn't it become a heavier and heavier burden for those who support that safety net, until one day it could break and then drop all of those helpless people to their deaths?

Quote:
What would happen if you opened a dialogue with one of these women? What would happen to your perception if, in that dialogue, you saw just a woman, just a mother?... and she told you as a woman and as a mother, she is miserable, she feels like a loser, that she hates feeling weak... like the system and her community failed her... If she were to open herself to you, like that, and show her vulnerability, describe herself using the same verbage you have used here... would she then be deserving of the help she receives... again, from a gov't assistance program that we all have had to pay into at some point?
I would tell her she made choices all throughout the 15 years I have known her (that applies to several of these women) in order to get into this position she thought she wanted to be in. If she wants to be in a different position, she needs to start making different choices. She still has options. There is a lot of help available to those who want to make use of it.

Remember, I am talking about people who CHOSE this life. Decisions I watched them make from early adolescence, that it appears most of them would be willing to make again if they had it to do over again. If they want a change, I am happy to help them. But why would they want a change if they have everything they value and don't care where it comes from?

Quote:
See, and this just tears it. Not only are you parceling out character judgements and morality labels, you assume that what I shared with you (in an effort to illustrate that we are an example of the types who use assistance and are not on hard-times, are not unlucky, and do not feel guilty) was done out of some misguided need for validation.
I was just giving you back a bit of the patronizing assumption I was feeling from you.

I am not very good at it, having no experience.

I apologise for the failed attempt -- both the attempt and the failure.

Quote:
Yes, I may know why we made our choices, and yes I do feel secure about what we do... but YOU don't know what my moral compass is. I could be sitting here with a bong for all you know, while dd runs naked into the driveway.... she's been known to! Lol.
Isn't that exactly what I said? I don't need to know. You are the one who needs to know.

I am sure you view me, due to your own assumptions, as a person who feels a need to measure and weigh others and conclude with a judgment. That is what I get for a single time in my life expressing my frustration at those who choose a parasitical life. But, a single rant experience in my life doesn't mean I am that person you imagine that goes around all day judging. I couldn't care less what choices people make, past choosing to neglect their children.

Based on my political philosophy, I don't believe a person's choices should be limited to a list of options that any individual or group has determined to be acceptable. The exception is neglect/abuse of dependent children. The people I refer to have made a choice from among legitimate options.

My concern, from a political/societal view, is always alerted when I notice a situation where the central authority might be swaying people's choices in an unnatural way. So, I am concerned that our system's mechanisms might be PRODUCING people in poverty conditions.

Someone mentioned pages ago that ideally our system would support all the poor. I would like to amend that to say: Ideally, our system would have no poor in the first place. Ideally it would be configured in such a way that it didn't funnel people into poverty.

---------------

Prenna: To address your concerns: I don't feel picked on or offended.

What I feel is that I am not a very effective communicator. I have given mistaken impressions every step of the way, and find myself going way off my original point to try to make them clearer, without success. I guess I am not good at predicting the standard set of cultural assumptions and terminology. I consider this practice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
Nobody is judging you for how you live. What is being judged is your harsh judgment of those of us who rely on welfare to get by.

That is it. So no, the judgment is not going both ways.
Ahhhh, but I didn't judge you, or any group of people referred to by "those of us." I simply made a statement that I know of many of my peers who chose a lifestyle of dependence on public assistance out of selfishness, and didn't make use of their opportunity of staying home to give care to their children. I was entirely referring to people I know personally.

Everything else came later in a failed attempt to clarify. But even then, I never judged you. I don't know you or the mysterious "those of us." I don't know anything about any of you.

The entire purpose of my statement was to answer the OP question about why being a SAHM on welfare has a bad name. I was supplying some examples of people who use welfare in a way that rubs many people's values the wrong way, and therefore turns off many people to the idea that a woman can SAH without being a parasite.

Clearly it doesn't rub PrennaMama the wrong way, but it rubs enough people the wrong way to contribute to a negative impression of SAHMing, and using public assistance.

It was never my goal to go down all the side streets, like defending my right to think of a person who either chooses parasitism as a career or neglects their children as a "loser." I know I have that right to think of them by that term, as everyone has a right to think of anyone by any term they like. It really was an irrelevent tangent. It was also irrelevent to spend time proving that I do know people who neglect their children, or making the case that they are content with that lifestyle.

I would very much prefer to get back to the original idea, and explore the cultural mechanisms involved in views of wealth and poverty. My DH has recently been reading something (sorry, in another language) about the evolution of views of wealth and poverty over time based on the influence of predominant religious views of the time. For example, the book mentions that Calvinism included in it a concept that God had predetermined who will go to heaven and who will not, and the earthly manifestation of that is through wealth -- so those with wealth are those who are predetermined to go to heaven. Therefore, anyone without wealth must be one that God doesn't think highly of, and that makes them less of a person. This view seems to have invaded much of our culture.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2BlueFish
DH and my 12 combined years of schooling that we got without any help from the gov't, that we worked hard for - to be at the top of our class - so we could have the degree of finacial stability that allows me to stay home cannot be simply dismissed as "priviledge". The person who makes that statement has judged *my life* - labeled me. The offense is equal.
I know what you mean. It bothers me when people call my current financial situation "luck" when I know that I, and DH, have worked our butts off our whole lives to be in this position. (I have memories of being a small child inside doing my homework while I could hear all the other children in the neighborhood playing and laughing outside. <sigh>)

We made some financial mistakes (an $87,000 mistake), and put off having children until we had fully paid for them (living on just my $30,000 salary, in a high cost of living place like NYC). We lost 8 years doing that. 8 years of living on so tight of a budget, and in such poor conditions, that it makes the standard of living of my sister's friends on welfare look like luxury. I guess instead of waiting those 8 years to have children (our dream that we grieved for constantly during that time, still brings tears to my eyes to remember how much emotional pain DH was in due to his inability to achieve enough financially) we could probably have gone on public assistance and done it anyway. But, I didn't have it in me to saddle someone else with the consequences of MY life choices.

Anyway, what bothers me infinitely more than having my hard work dismissed as luck is the fact that it simply reinforces the attitude that there is no effort or choice involved in determining one's situation. Too many people feel they are powerless. They are unaware of their ability to make their own good fortune. I would like everyone to have the opportunity to feel empowered to climb out of their hole, or to protect themselves from falling into a hole in the first place.

I think of public assistance as a tool -- a means to an end, not the end itself. It is a means to avoid or get out of the hole. Otherwise, it just becomes another hole itself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama
I think that fails to acknowledge your privilege, privilege that in this system happens on the backs of the underclass. We all have it, to varying degrees. Yours, combined with your hard work etc etc kept you off the dole.
And that is why I confined myself to examples of girls I grew up with, who went to the same schools, and had the same opportunities I did.

Nobody could call them the underclass, or say that anything is happening on their backs.

I stuck with them as an example of someone who had sufficient privilege and chose not to avail themselves of it because they didn't fear, or have any shame about, the consequences of goofing off their whole lives.



Do any of you socialists realize that one of the main causes of poverty is caused by the government: inflation. Americans haven't really had any increase in "real" (adjusted for inflation) salary in roughly 3 decades. Our purchasing power has been eroded dramatically. Remember how our parents could have one parent working a blue collar job and the other at home and live decently with several children? Why can't we do that now? The government prints money and spends it like lightning. It is a self-enforcing feedback loop. More social programs for the needy --> more government spending --> less purchasing power --> more needy.

The government got us into this poverty loop, and it can't be trusted to get us out of it. It has taken on a life of its own, and as with any living thing, its priority is its own survival. Dependents don't bite the hand that feeds. More dependent poor means greater security for the system that it won't have to face a revolution.

The solution is to enable each individual to be powerful enough not to need public assistance. Then, the incentive to maintain the system as it is goes *poof*, and we can all start working on reforming it.

(Sorry for going all "economist" on you all. That is my field of expertise. I can site my degree in Economics, but I really feel like it was useless. All my useful info I got via self-study in my spare time.)

--------

I like bluefish's distinction between empowerment and privilege.

Privilege is something confined to a narrow group, and they usually use it to maintain their position of privilege.

Empowerment is something everyone can utilize (though clearly not all to the same end, because of different starting positions) and is usually used to empower others.

The reason my family, socialists, don't like my views, is that they want to give fish while I want to give fishing rods. They think I am uncompassionate for not wanting to give fish, and then can't comprehend the fishing rod part. They just look at the first part of the cliche saying, and then try and sentence me.

Anyone ever heard the saying "When I fed the poor, they called me a saint. When I asked why there are poor, they called me a Communist." The reason that Communism was used in that saying was because at the time of the saying the anti-status-quo was communisms. Now that the status-quo philosophy is socialism, the anti-status-quo appears to be libertarianism.

-----

I don't feel like I have been wronged by anybody. I am too empowered to feel victimized. Victimhood is like a metal ball chained to your leg while swimming. I refuse to be a victim.

--------

OK, bed time. Thank you all for getting me through a horrible night of headache that kept me up. It appears to be gone now, so I can finally go to sleep.

Leigh, mama to Rostislav homeborn Aug 9 2007, and Oksana homeborn Feb 24 2011.
Lady Lilya is offline  
#628 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 09:38 AM
 
BetsyS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: world of craziness
Posts: 5,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This thread is interesting.

Much of it, though, is out of my frame of reference. I do know people and know of people that have depended on welfare at some point in raising children. Some WOHM and some SAHM. But, in my state, welfare (the actual money part) has a tight lifetime limit of 5 years. If you start on welfare at age 16, you better be off by 21, or you're just out of luck. The 5 years can be broken up, but for a lifetime, we're talking 5 years.

WIC is self limiting, as well, with benefits only available until your youngest child is 5 years old. Food stamps require that the household be working after they receive benefits for 3 months out of 36. And, I'm sure that if you work and have income, that your benefits are cut.

Unless someone has just 1 child, and they only plan on being a SAHM until that child is schoolage, then I guess I just don't see HOW it's possible to stay at home on welfare for the long term. What I see around here, mostly, is dads that work under the table, helping to support a family where the mom might work part time, through a tangled combination of some welfare, some money for work, some WIC, some everything. And, eventually, the welfare part ends, and the parents are surviving on the money they bring in.

To me, welfare and folks needing it just isn't a straight line... This is okay, this is not. It's such a circular thing, with so many variables. There have been posters on this thread that, if they work 3 too many hours, their benefits are cut, and then what's the purpose of working adn being away from your kids?? I don't know that we'll ever find real answers.
BetsyS is offline  
#629 of 1188 Old 07-10-2007, 05:18 PM
 
lilylove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: SE MI
Posts: 4,983
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am returning this thread. Several posts have been removed for either violating the UA or for quoting/referring to a post that violated the UA. If you have any questions or concerns about a post that was removed please contact me via pm.

Please, when posting, keep the UA in mind. I know this is a very personal and emotional topic for many, but posts of an attacking or insultingly sarcastic nature will be removed and the member(s) alerted.

Sandy, proud mama and henna artist. :
lilylove is offline  
#630 of 1188 Old 07-11-2007, 10:01 AM
Banned
 
MamaNosBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 524
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
Yes I can see why!



Well, I disagree. I think you are doing that thing of "I worked so hard, that is why I didn't get wellie. And you can too!"

I think that fails to acknowledge your privilege, privilege that in this system happens on the backs of the underclass. We all have it, to varying degrees. Yours, combined with your hard work etc etc kept you off the dole.

Not so for everyone.

And now we have come full circle on this discussion.
This line of thought always boggles me. Every "argument" about how it might be possible to achieve self-suffiency via hard work can be dismissed, apparently, because:

You're a man! unfair privilage
You're white! unfair privilage
You come from a "privilaged background"! unfair privilage!
You're American! unfair privilage
You're etc. etc. etc. unfair privilage

And what if you're none of those things, like my in laws, immigrants who arrived here with no English and no education and no money?

I guess they have an unfair advantge -- they're "privilaged" because they're Asian.

Can everyone do it? Certainly not. Could some that don't do it, do it if they wanted to? Certainly so.

We're not passive victims of life. We all make choices, and those choices have consequences (I'm aware this is an unpopular view to many).

If a person is one of the many that could improve their situationn if they truly wanted to and were willing to work to make it happen but instead they choose to whinge about their lot -- well, I have very little sympathy for them. I'll save my sympathy for their kids, who haven't got the choice (having been one of those kids, I might add).
MamaNosBest is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off