Hi there! You are currently browsing as a guest. Why not create an account? Then you get less ads, can thank creators, post feedback, keep a list of your favourites, and more!
Mad Poster
Original Poster
#1 Old 7th Jan 2019 at 9:38 PM
Well it should stand to reason that any working woman will not be able to progress in ther career as much as any working man, should she have a child during this particular period of time. A scenario in which the mother progresses as much in her career as the man could realistically only be the result of affirmative action (also known as positive discrimination), which is something that was commonly appreciated for a while but is now falling out of favour over concerns that it's, among other things, condescending and unfair.
In real life motherhood is, in fact, the largest contributing factor to the gender wage gap phenomenon. And while half a century ago a pregnancy would surely mean the end of a woman's working career, nowadays it can go all sorts of ways. Usually at her own discretion, too.

insert signature here
( Join my dumb Discord server if you're into the whole procrastination thing. But like, maybe tomorrow. )
Advertisement
Lab Assistant
#2 Old 7th Jan 2019 at 10:55 PM
Just speaks to why balancing motherhood and an active career requires a great bit of compromise. This is why women with particularly stressful and competitive professions like CEOs or lawyers tend to opt out of it entirely.
Scholar
#4 Old 8th Jan 2019 at 8:25 AM


favorite quote: "When ElaineNualla is posting..I always read..Nutella. I am sorry" by Rosebine
self-claimed "lower-spec simmer"
Mad Poster
Original Poster
#5 Old 8th Jan 2019 at 8:30 AM
I'm sure the term "positive discrimination" has been around for as long as anyone other than white heterosexual men has been allowed to hold a job. The intentions are noble, for sure, but it's proven not to be that great of an idea. What you're essentially doing is fighting inequality with.....more inequality. I don't really know the politics of it but I'm sure it's not crazy to think that maybe, if you plan to bear and raise children, you're not going to have much time to be a CEO anyway. I happen to know for a fact that 100% of male CEOs have never been pregnant.

Anyway, it seems The Sims is fairly enlightened on this either way and I think we need not worry about it. Aside from occasional snafus (getting slandered by the press in LN for having a child out of wedlock like it's 1932) I'd say the game is generally vaguely competent at treating people equally.

insert signature here
( Join my dumb Discord server if you're into the whole procrastination thing. But like, maybe tomorrow. )
Mad Poster
Original Poster
#6 Old 8th Jan 2019 at 12:43 PM
To be fair, the dog house thing was genuinely fucking dumb. I wouldn't force my dog to live outside the house in a little shack either, but in a game that otherwise strongly relies on classic stereotypes of suburban American living, how can they seriously exclude it? That's as typical as the white picket fence, the housewife with the apple pie and the landyacht in the driveway. I can excuse the housewife not being there because we're not sexist pigs anymore, and I can excuse the landyacht because they died out in the 1970s. The Japanese came over, after all, and convinced America of the virtues of the econobox. But I'm not allowed to talk about this any further lest it skim too close to the subject matter of my next Bridgeport'88 episode.

insert signature here
( Join my dumb Discord server if you're into the whole procrastination thing. But like, maybe tomorrow. )
Inventor
#7 Old 8th Jan 2019 at 1:44 PM
With us, it's 30 (15+15) days for father only; however, the whole of maternity leave (1 year: a month obligatory before the birth) can be divided between the partners (or even another person in appropriate circumstances) as they see fit. All of it is paid, nothing (but that one month) is enforced.

I know about "positive discrimination". Such a rule does not exist where I am living; personally, I completely disagree with it. Meritocracy all the way.

----------------------------
On a totally unrelated note: when I went to sleep I had one "disagree" and no answers. When I woke up, a whole thread was going on. That reminds me of an old experience. With us, in a seminar the professor spoke and students listened and did not speak unless prodded by a stick, so to speak. When I came to a seminar at an American university I was shocked to notice that everybody was talking all of the time (except for me, unless prodded by a stick).
Mad Poster
Original Poster
#8 Old 8th Jan 2019 at 3:36 PM Last edited by GrijzePilion : 8th Jan 2019 at 3:57 PM.
I don't think I know what you're talking about. Fairies? Culture? Me complaining? However, since you're clearly out to be mad for the hell of it, for whatever reason you might have to, it doesn't matter a goddamn thing to me. I for one have better things to do than consistently be rude to others without actually ever having the guts to make it a proper spit roast. If you're going to be rude to me, make it hurt. More fun for all involved.

Actually: I lied. I will entertain the comment above because the idea that participating in the economy whilst disapproving of market capitalism is hypocrisy, is such a shallow argument that I can't help but take note of it. To what end would you say that it's hypocrisy? It's always the same example of the new iPhone every year. I must've heard that one a hundred times by now. Makes sense, because it's easy and so unsubtle that an oranguatan could be made to agree with it. I just wonder if it only applies to iPhones or other stuff as well. I drank Pepsi yesterday; clearly I must be a dreaded champagne socialist. How dare I use any product with a brand name, surely I'm actively promoting the excesses of the market. I also can't help but feel that anyone who buys a new iPhone every year is more than a hypocrite. I'd say, fashion victim, bad with money, shallow. I just got a new phone last week because my old one had a rendezvous with the floor but if it hadn't, I'd be using it for more than those 2 years. I'm a loyal Samsung user, for the record, so feel free to yell at me.

Anyway, I get the feeling that this is the kind of thread that's only going to get worse as it goes on. This forum is too nice for shit-slinging political talk, at least, some of you guys are, and I don't see the point in continuing it given that it's not particularly welcome. I'd really love to take it up elsewhere and I'm totally up for making a play-date out of it but it'll have to wait, I've got to sit out my inevitable permaban for a bit

insert signature here
( Join my dumb Discord server if you're into the whole procrastination thing. But like, maybe tomorrow. )
dodgy builder
#9 Old 8th Jan 2019 at 5:10 PM
In my country men has leave as well. Some silly guys of course went to some EU court or something, claiming the men should have as much leave as the woman. We had some more for woman, since they carried the baby, and the body might need more time to heal, but no the court didn't think so. Concequence is, woman got less and men got more. Probably not what they wanted lol. The government probably though they had enough time off

It turned out if guys get to use their fatherleave, it has to be obligatory. The businesses doesn't like it, but the fathers love it.
Scholar
#10 Old 8th Jan 2019 at 8:32 PM
Maybe we get a stick (a long one) and keep the fighting between so called (by theirs antagonists) "SJW" and theirs opposition, these, I dunno... "antisocial just warriors" or "social injustice warriors" ( (?) sry, I cannot help) at the distance. A serious one. Please?
#prettypleaseface

My question wasn't intended as a part of deep social academic debate, it was just curiosity, "we Europeans" [insert: GorillaProudChestBumpingTag]*, even minor or tiniest ones, use to forget that USA is really big and diverse country, my friends from there (for example) are quite diversed in opinions in said topic, I presume: because of theirs' personal experience.

Back to the game: I'd say @igazor pointed in right direction - while in the game world, somewhat between Disney-like kind of suburbia and nightmare-like from Stepford Wifes or Edward Scissorhand (or Adams Family *wink*) there's rather complete equality (25 years old violet-skin gay vampire-witch hybrid girl as Politician level 10? no problem) and career's levels diversity depends of much more that just "working hard".**



*please, could we have that kind of emoji there #prettierfaceplease
** actualy my only one super bussines millionaire sim has never "worked hard" in his simlife, he always just slacked with his great irrestible charisma at command, becoming top career before 40... isn't that somewhat ehm. Realistic? Kinda?


favorite quote: "When ElaineNualla is posting..I always read..Nutella. I am sorry" by Rosebine
self-claimed "lower-spec simmer"
Mad Poster
Original Poster
#11 Old 8th Jan 2019 at 8:32 PM
It's been a very normal thing for quite some time. I really don't disagree with its purpose but clearly, it's something that's just not really compatible with our values. We're artificially inflating the performance of certain demographics on the job market. It strongly undermines the notion that, you know, any of these people could ACTUALLY be as competent as the straight white male. The more you think about it, really, the less sense it makes. But on the other hand it bothers me when one group of people turns out to be less competent than the other. No person should be better or worse than another, but sometimes that's how it is.

At least Sims are all equal in every sense of the word. There's a small voice inside of me that yearns for a Sims game where all the ugliness of the real world is prevalent, be it bigotry, hate, jealousy, anger. It could even be fun, having to play as a Sim who is treated like a lesser human. But I agree wholeheartedly with the way the game is right now.

insert signature here
( Join my dumb Discord server if you're into the whole procrastination thing. But like, maybe tomorrow. )
Mad Poster
Original Poster
#13 Old 9th Jan 2019 at 10:13 AM
Only a Sith deals in absolutes......and that's why I watch Star Trek

insert signature here
( Join my dumb Discord server if you're into the whole procrastination thing. But like, maybe tomorrow. )
Scholar
#14 Old 9th Jan 2019 at 10:32 AM Last edited by mithrak_nl : 9th Jan 2019 at 10:34 AM. Reason: need more words to make sentences :/
I never understood why giving birth to a kid should be so hindering a woman's career. Unless they chose themselves to stay at home the coming years to take care of them ofc. But otherwise I think it is ridiculous that the idea alone (that a woman could get pregnant) is a reason to limit someone's career options in many parts of the world (if not most).

I can think of only a few positions where being physically away from a job for a long time , could be a problem for a company if they won't get a (temporarily) replacement. And the funny thing is, those are all hands on jobs. So at lower positions in a company. Jobs where you have to be physically present (production worker, service jobes etc). But that would be the same case if someone becomes ill. I mean a flu could cause someone to be unavailable for communication for a longer period then when all goes well giving birth. Anyway, even if they would take full three months rest after giving birth, it should be still possible for most positions to cope with that. Especially because you see it coming from a mile away and can plan for it so you can do the work from home,or to assist a temporarily replacement.

Nowadays with fast internet communication and smartphones it is ridiculous that there is still this way of thinking. Someone's brain does not stop after having a child.
Mad Poster
Original Poster
#15 Old 9th Jan 2019 at 12:39 PM Last edited by GrijzePilion : 9th Jan 2019 at 12:53 PM.
I don't think it's inherently wrong, parenthood should always take priority over work. That goes for all parents equally, there's really no reason the mother should stay at home and do the parenting if there's another parent figure in the picture. But having a child means dealing with the responsibilities that come with it. In a Sim sort of dynamic it's something that I've used to retcon certain things about the character of Lorelei in Bridgeport 2017. Technically, of course, Laura is just a made over clone of Lorelei but the story goes that Laura and Jeremy have a daughter together around the time Bridgeport'88 begins.
Laura is hell-bent on making the most of her career while Jeremy fades away after a few years. This would explain why Lorelei is a socially restrained person who has no family close to her, but enough money to live on her own comfortably. Laura was never able to take care of her adequately, but made up for it by providing for her estranged daughter. It's a nice contrast to Amber who was always very close with her parents, and who eventually exceeded their achievements.

Amber has two parents who both had a good career at the time; Lorelei has one. Amber's parents didn't let work get in the way of their responsibilities as parents.....Laura did. In the "Farlands" save none of this is relevant because genuine human interaction can largely be supplemented by technology. That's not to say that a child should ever be left to their own with a non-tactile hologram, or a very real android figure for that matter. The hologram is literally a cloud of polarized photons projected onto a light-sensitive oxygen field. It cannot be touched, it's not a coherent physical entity and merely emulates a human presence (or a pot plant for that matter, holographic flora are NOT a cool sort of thing but businesses love to use them). It's short-term only and extremely harmful to have to spend a life with. Any automaton-android companion, while definitely physical, won't do it either. Like chemically induced sleep supplements, a normal human mind can only interact with those impulses for so long before the illusion shatters and severe mental health issues kick in. That's not even science fiction, that's an issue you can see coming a century or two in advance. Children need tender love and care and nothing can replace that.

insert signature here
( Join my dumb Discord server if you're into the whole procrastination thing. But like, maybe tomorrow. )
Field Researcher
#17 Old 10th Jan 2019 at 12:30 AM


Is this a serious reply or are you being sarcastic? If you're being serious, may I ask you how old are you?

Honestly can't tell.

e.g you say you don't want to offend anybody but yet you say "Anyhow, I hope you men reading this learned a few things" as if men, in general, were that stupid.
Mad Poster
Original Poster
#20 Old 10th Jan 2019 at 8:21 AM
Other way around for me, I let my Simming take precedence over socializing and it's definitely a major reason for me being single. It's a conscious choice on the one hand and a shortcoming on the other.

insert signature here
( Join my dumb Discord server if you're into the whole procrastination thing. But like, maybe tomorrow. )
Scholar
#22 Old 10th Jan 2019 at 9:30 AM
Quote: Originally posted by nitromon


I like to answer this but I want you to know I'm purely answering it as a sociological response. Please, anyone reading this do not be offended.

This is such a "man" response and it is what gets man into trouble and what causes a lot of our problems in society regarding men/women. And I say that not to lecture men but sharing how I use to think exactly the same way until I got into enough breakups and their constant complaint was how insensitive I was and how I didn't "get them." And it is such differences why men and women don't get along.

I say it is a "man" answer b/c men typically think more rationally, logically... to them it is always about the physical equation. Hey, you popped a kid, get back to work next day if you're physically ok. What's the big deal?

An example: A girl thinks she might be pregnant and talks to her boyfriend about it. Boyfriend says, sure go get a test. If you're pregnant, go to the doctor and get an abortion. Girl asks the boy to go with her to the doctor, he replies, "Why? I'll give you the money and you just go in your spare time and get it done. Why do I need to be there? What's the big deal?"

Women are typically more emotional than men and by that I don't mean simply take how you feel and multiply it. It isn't just intensity of feeling but they feel a lot more times/circumstances, feel more weird feelings we know nothing about. Hey, I'm not agreeing with it. I would like it if women are not so emotional, however, aging has taught me there are some things you cannot change and men and women are different. That's just the way it is.

So with that understanding, look at pregnancy again. It isn't just the physical recovery, but pregnant women are a giant ball of emotions. That's what the recovery part is for. They need the time to bond with the child and get over any emotional issues etc... until they're emotionally ready to get back to work. Now, some women can be ready within a day, some months, some years. That's just how it is.

Frankly, I think it is good for the kid too. You know kids behavior starts to shape the day you take them home from the hospital. And I think kids who are born and then dumped at a daycare or in the hands of a stranger called nanny while parents focus on their career is bad for the child. Lack of genuine nurturing and strong connection with parents is what created a generation of disrespectful sociopaths that think they're entitled to everything. Probably b/c their parents spoiled them with physical gifts as a compensation for their guilt of not being there.

Anyhow, I hope you men reading this learned a few things. When your wife or girlfriend needs to get an abortion, a cancer screening, etc... Don't just give her your credit card and say, "Go get it done." You actually have to go with them. You don't have to understand why. You don't have to agree with it. You just need to get it done and be there. I learned it the hard way.


I never said women didn't need time to recover after pregnacy. But unlike you I did not use blanket statements to argue that they all will be some ball of raging emotions. You seem to have missed most of my post except for the part you quoted. How lmuch time they need to recover will depend on the situation and individual. But my point was, that in this day and age, where for most positions you can work from home (for a while at least), it is ridiculous to write pregnant women off for a certain career perspective. Especially in most cases where a pregnacy is planned.

Also your 'women tend to have more emotions' is an empty statement and has nothing to do with this. Anyone professional enough in a position with lot of responsibility will likely learn to recognise when they are being emotional and try to not get that in the way of their decisions. Otherwise you won't stay in such a position for long. I don't see a reason why women would be less good at this then men (not showing emotions does not mean they are not there or less strong). This also ties into their recovery and potentially being extra emotional. You don't suddenly unlearn your job during pregnancy and will still recognise whether you are ready again to perform it. Maybe with the help of your partner if there is one. And in any case, this should be valued at a performance assessment, not just writing them off beforehand, because 'women! '.

Whether it is better for the child that a parent stays home after birth, has nothing to do with this. Besides that can be done by their partner too. This is also something for the couple to decide and not by other people. And definetely not the company they work for.
Scholar
#23 Old 10th Jan 2019 at 3:56 PM Last edited by ElaineNualla : 10th Jan 2019 at 7:48 PM.


favorite quote: "When ElaineNualla is posting..I always read..Nutella. I am sorry" by Rosebine
self-claimed "lower-spec simmer"
Mad Poster
Original Poster
#25 Old 11th Jan 2019 at 10:37 AM
Quote: Originally posted by nitromon
I kid you not, my 2nd to last gf was a simmer and she and i gotten along better than any of my previous relationships, we never fought once. it only ended b/c i left the country to return to the USA. but right now we're actually talking it through about getting back together. i'm considering leaving the USA for her. a woman who appreciates the art of sims is hard to find.

There's something romantic about finding a broad abroad isn't there? I hope to find someone close enough to me that I can go see her on a couple of hour's notice, but I find the idea of foreign love to be very appealling as well. I just don't think it's as fun being with someone local who you're always free to be with, whose cultural norms are wholly identical to yours. Over here, 2-3 hours by train gets you to another corner of the country and the people are a bit different as well. Like in any nation they're colder up north and warmer down south. They speak harshly up north and softly down south. One is a pragmatic and historically Protestant culture, the other shuts down every February to dress up in silly costumes and get dangerously intoxicated.

insert signature here
( Join my dumb Discord server if you're into the whole procrastination thing. But like, maybe tomorrow. )
 
Page 1 of 3
Back to top