MSN article


11 March 2006

How to have a baby and a career

This brainless MSN article, by Emma-Lou Montgomery, “MSN Money Special Correspondent”, shows how retarded it is in the first paragraph by somehow making it out that Gwyneth Paltrow and Angelina Jolie are typical average women.

But it gets even more retarded, not to mention clichéd.

The report says a mid-skilled 24-year-old who gives birth will earn £564,000 less over her lifetime than her childless counterpart, as a result of motherhood narrowing her career options.

Yes, that’s because mothers take time off work, and if you take time off work you’re not going to get fucking paid for it. Furthermore most mothers have the option of not working, either because they’ve got a husband to provide for them or the government to do so.

To be fair to the IPPR, it didn’t set out to ear-bash women, it wants politicians to take note and support better childcare.

How nice of the government and its agencies do not want to ear-bash women. I wish they’d stop bashing us men, earwise or otherwise.

Childlessness is now forecast on a scale not seen since the mass male fatalities of the First World War destroyed many women’s hopes of motherhood…

Yeah, how fucking selfish and spiteful of those young men getting slaughtered in their thousands during the First World War and thus destroying women’s hopes of motherhood. Maybe we should all piss on the graves of war veterans to teach them a lesson for selfishly getting killed and inconveniencing women in the process.


For fucks sake! Is there no limit to women’s selfish attitude? Are women capable of grasping the concepts of responsibility, sacrifice and justice to any degree whatsoever? Evidently not. Thousands and thousands of young men were cut to pieces by machine-gun fire in the First World War yet this pampered little brain-dead fucknut, Emma Loo-Whatever, can’t help but shoulder aside the male victims of such a massacre and steal their victimhood. “Women are the real victims, waaagh!”

The First World War was not the fault of the average man and, likewise, the childless state of many women’s lives these days is not the fault of the average man; it’s women’s fault for buying into feminism. They were told to have a career instead of kids and they bought it. If women are upset because having a fancy job-title and a big salary doesn’t make up for the fact that they will die childless and will never feel the powerful emotion inspired by a toddler calling them ‘mummy’ then that’s their problem. I don’t give a shit.

In fact it’s worth pausing for a moment and realise what this woman is inadvertently admitting; feminism has had an effect on society equal to that of a world war!

Just how do you manage to fulfill your career ambitions AND your desire for a baby? That’s a decision you alone will have to make.

That’s funny, I though that the decision to have a baby was a choice for the father too, not just the mother. After all, we’re the ones who get hit with Child Support bills.

The inflexibility in the system means you can be financially penalised through no fault of your own.

So apparently choosing to have a baby is a decision women have to make alone, yet if they suffer any financial penalties then it’s not that woman’s fault. Surely if she chose to make the decision to have kids then any consequences are her fault.

Oh wait, silly me, I’m assuming women should be held accountable for their actions and decisions. How sexist of me.

When it comes to being looked after financially, as a working mum your best bet is most probably your employer.

We’re told how supposedly independent women are yet all they care about seemingly is being “looked after.”

Look after your damn self.

The stupid whore who wrote that article probably has a degree and no doubt gets paid for writing such shit. Quite incredible really.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 10:52 PM


%d bloggers like this: