What Elizabeth Warren's Critics Get Wrong About Discrimination (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
    I don't care for the basic premise of the article, which seems to be:

    Discrimination against pregnant women exists, and was more prevalent in the 1970's before legislation protecting pregnant women, therefore we should accept Warren's story, despite her prior inconsistent statement as well as the documentary evidence that her claim is false.

    Warren has shown a willingness to throw other people under the bus in order to allow her to check a victim box. If you recall, it wasn't just that she claimed that she is Native American, she also claimed that her own family members treated her poorly because of ethnicity.
     
    Last edited:
    Ignoring the immense irony of Trump supporters talking about someone’s honesty...

    I feel like the bigger discussion here is if we’d be so quick to point the“liar” finger at an Edward Warren. I mean, I understand the “I didn’t want to go there” thing, we’ve all been there. And there is certainly grounds to believe she was pushed out. Hell, it happened to my mother under similar circumstances.

    That said, there are previous issues with Warren that are going to (fairly) magnify anything like this, and she has to be cognizant of that.

    I’d generally lean to the truth being somewhere in the middle, but we’ll never really know.
     
    Thank you for posting your article. For many of us, we wouldn't have exposure to it without this website. I truly believe we as a society would benefit from more support for our pregnant women and mother's with new borns in the workplace. What we have as standard maternity leave is socially negligent compared to Western European nations.
     
    Beach Friends said:
    I don't care for the basic premise of the article, which seems to be:

    Discrimination against pregnant women exists, and was more prevalent in the 1970's before legislation protecting pregnant women, therefore we should accept Warren's story, despite her prior inconsistent statement as well as the documentary evidence that her claim is false.

    Warren has shown a willingness to throw other people under the bus in order to allow her to check a victim box. If you recall, it wasn't just that she claimed that she is Native American, she also claimed that her own family members treated her poorly because of ethnicity.
    Click to expand...

    Could you share your “documentary evidence”?
     
    Beach Friends said:
    I don't care for the basic premise of the article, which seems to be:

    Discrimination against pregnant women exists, and was more prevalent in the 1970's before legislation protecting pregnant women, therefore we should accept Warren's story, despite her prior inconsistent statement as well as the documentary evidence that her claim is false.

    Warren has shown a willingness to throw other people under the bus in order to allow her to check a victim box. If you recall, it wasn't just that she claimed that she is Native American, she also claimed that her own family members treated her poorly because of ethnicity.
    Click to expand...

    The article address that. Is there a reason you're not taking that into consideration?

    Warren is now fully standing by her story, and she told CBS that the reason she didn’t provide the same details in 2007 was that she simply wasn’t ready to open up about her personal history. As to the report that she voluntarily resigned, it’s ludicrous to think that workplace discrimination would be spelled out in official county records. CBS found two women who worked at Riverdale elementary, the same school where Warren worked, the same year she was there, and both said it was the school’s unwritten policy to let go of women once they were visibly pregnant. "The rule was at five months you had to leave when you were pregnant,” said Trudy Randall.

    But the narrative that Warren lied has caught fire anyway among her critics and wormed its way into the mainstream news cycle. New York Times politics reporter Shane Goldmacher speculated that it could “quickly” gain hold of “half of the electorate” and become a problem for her in a hypothetical general election. Reporters asked her over and over on Monday and again on Tuesday whether she lied about how she lost her job 48 years ago, to which she repeatedly said no.
    Click to expand...
     
    Last edited:
    In general, I'll say this.

    Sexism clearly still exists in the work place, but overall, it's a lot better. I also have found, in my field, that the women who can hack it are often far better than the guys. Basically, they have to be better in order to get equal treatment. But I have seen a good push towards promoting women and giving opportunities.
     
    MT15 said:
    Could you share your “documentary evidence”?
    Click to expand...

    I can't link to it at the moment, but I will be glad to when I get back on a laptop. To describe them - there were docs showing that her contract was renewed and the board lated accepted her resignation.
     
    I'm not *that* old but things were very, very different. I was in elementary school during that time frame and we just didn't see any pregnant teachers. Like ever. Maybe it was different in big cities. When I started teaching in the 80s, I heard the same message from my teacher-relatives - stay home and raise your own child(ren) - which I am glad I did! But...financially there was a cost. I cannot retire. Most people have *no* idea that public school teachers cannot collect social security, it's just pension (if it hasn't been raided) and that depends on staying in one state for a good 25 years or so. Politicians acting in bad faith, along with years and years of underfunding have brought us to the point where teaching is no longer a career option if you are not independently wealthy. We're only women, to some. Still.
     
    Sharon said:
    I'm not *that* old but things were very, very different. I was in elementary school during that time frame and we just didn't see any pregnant teachers. Like ever. Maybe it was different in big cities. When I started teaching in the 80s, I heard the same message from my teacher-relatives - stay home and raise your own child(ren) - which I am glad I did! But...financially there was a cost. I cannot retire. Most people have *no* idea that public school teachers cannot collect social security, it's just pension (if it hasn't been raided) and that depends on staying in one state for a good 25 years or so. Politicians acting in bad faith, along with years and years of underfunding have brought us to the point where teaching is no longer a career option if you are not independently wealthy. We're only women, to some. Still.
    Click to expand...

    I never knew that, but it does depend on the state you live in.

    Now teachers in 12 states -- Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Missouri, Nevada, Ohio, and Texas -- don't have coverage arrangements with Social Security. In addition, three other states -- Georgia, Kentucky, and Rhode Island -- have varying degrees of coverage that differ by school district.
    Click to expand...
     
    Beach Friends said:
    I can't link to it at the moment, but I will be glad to when I get back on a laptop. To describe them - there were docs showing that her contract was renewed and the board lated accepted her resignation.
    Click to expand...

    Never mind, I figured it out. I think you’d have to be fairly naive to think that the official records would reflect that she was told her contract offer was being withdrawn because she was pregnant. Of course they offered her a contract and then when they found out she was pregnant the principal informed her verbally that it was withdrawn and she was expected to resign. That’s how it was done. It’s something that’s happened to literally millions of women.

    The right wing media that is pushing the narrative that she is lying about this when it rings totally true with the experiences of millions of women have made a serious miscalculation.
     
    Maxp said:
    Thank you for posting your article. For many of us, we wouldn't have exposure to it without this website. I truly believe we as a society would benefit from more support for our pregnant women and mother's with new borns in the workplace. What we have as standard maternity leave is socially negligent compared to Western European nations.
    Click to expand...

    My wife had a year off with each of our kids, with pay (not full mind you but a good portion) and the government is looking to expand it even further. She could also take a second year without pay and her job would be protected.

    it has been great for us.

    I would also have been eligible to take time off but would use some of her maternity leave and some people do that. A colleague took 8 months and her husband took 4.

    we’re big fans of this system generally.
     
    Yes, welcome! We could always use another feminine perspective. Sharon and I get lonely sometimes! 😁
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom