AdSense to Search

Custom Search

Wednesday, August 31, 2016

TheAmazingAtheist Gets Triggered by Sandra Fluke, and Bullshits His Audience

Yeah and everyone else is an SJW, right?

So the following tweet, which is rather harmless and really shouldn't trigger people (well, sane, rational people who don't have their heads up their asses), has done triggered the fat atheist. You know, because rational people get triggered by such things:

And how does he respond? Why, he takes her tweet way out of context, cries about how apparently Sandra Fluke is attacking egalitarianism even though she really isn't, and like the man-child he is he tweaks her surname to insult her. I mean, it's right there:

Who are the real SJWs again? Who are the real PC fascists, again? Does it look like Sandra Fluke argued, at all, that men don't deserve 'new parent leave'? Sure, she doesn't mention them, but is that the same thing as arguing that they don't deserve it, too? Perhaps it has more to do with the fact that women who have children on the job, in the U.S.A, are actually likely to lose their jobs just because they recently had a child. Fortunately for men, they are likely to get a bonus for fathering children; women, on the other hand, tend to get wage penalties. Indeed, women tend to lose 4% of their earnings for each children they rear, whereas men, fortunately for them, tend to earn 6% more earnings for each children they father. Their hiring and promotional opportunities actually tend to improve when they rear children because they're seen as more competent than their female counterparts.

The following block discusses the lack of protection for new mothers who are forced to go on leave because of a pregnancy, and if they are away for a certain (and very short, all things considered) amount of time they can lose their job or pay rates. They can even lose some of their benefits, like sick pay.

The professional binds begin, in many cases, before conception. Women who are even thinking about trying to get pregnant often feel tethered to whatever job they’re in at the time. A move to a new job—a better-paying or more prestigious job, a job with more manageable hours or a more dynamic boss—can mean losing vested benefits like built-up sick days, vacation days, or family leave, and with them, any promise of being able to take time off after a baby. The Family and Medical Leave Act, currently the only federal leave protection available to American workers who have babies, does not require that an employer pay a new mother for a single day of leave; it merely protects her job for twelve weeks of unpaid leave, and then, only if she has worked at her company for at least a year. So, in many states, if you take a new job and then, two months later, discover that you’re pregnant, and nine months later give birth, your employer has no obligation to hold your job for you; he can simply decide that he’d prefer to avoid the hassle and expense of finding a temporary replacement and let you go. During childbearing years, changing jobs—even for a fundamentally better gig—can be a very bad idea.

But don't tell TJ anything like this, because that'll hurt his bullshit agenda. You can criticize any and all groupthinks, TJ, but do it with integrity next time, you shithole.

No comments :