This is correct.
Taking back me
takingbackme
I will look at that! Much appreciated.
See, if I were in a podunk town, I’d agree with you. But I’m not. I live in one of the richest areas of my state. I am considering moving, but I can’t do that until my step son graduates high school.
I wish I had waited to go for my Master’s, I did the traditional route for undergrad, but that worked. My Masters, though, I got the same shit, if you don’t do it now, you won’t. They were wrong. I still want to get another, but can’t handle the debt that would go with it.
It can be impossible to actually get that though. The paperwork is intentionally difficult and cumbersome so that they can repeatedly reject it. Or, if your a teacher in urban schools, the schools have to fill out paperwork and they don’t. More great ideas with poor execution.
Continuing education requirements pretty much demand that you get a masters. It’s not necessary to start, but by year 5/6 you should. I live in a state with very high requirements to get certified as well. The GPA and score on the certification test are the highest in the US, at least it was when I got certified.
No, BimBot wouldn’t have a masters and be paid less than I would. Because teachers are on a salary schedule commiserate with their education and experience. The schools aren’t going to hire someone with a masters from no name state u nor private top tier u. Period. They’ll hire new teachers, flush out those that have…
“But it’s supported systemically by those who profit off of it”
Right? My not being able to pay off my Master’s has nothing to do with working at Starbucks and everything to do with being told I need to get this degree in order to teach and then turning around and saying, you got the degree, but now we won’t hire you because you have experience and education that’s too costly.
Student loan debt isn’t the same as materialistic debt, conflating the 2 is asinine.
Preach it sister! I had the older version, too. I just saw this when I searched for the link.
Men aren’t asking for it or are settling for less because they believe they won’t get a better outcome in court, because of historical BIAS. But, we’re supposed ignore cultural and societal issues for fathers. But for mothers, if they can’t pay child support there’s acceptable cultural and societal reasons for THAT.
I never said there wasn’t a bias against women. I said there’s also a bias against men. Also means “in addition to,” fyi.
Thanks for proving my point. Mothers ordered to pay Child Support are statistically less likely to pay the full amount, if at all. But, it’s okay because they’re women. A man not paying is a deadbeat loser, but a woman not paying, there’s a whole list of excuses.
You claim that states don’t have an every other weekend default then claim that MANY states have moved to 50/50. Many is not all. States that have an EOWE standard, such as Nevada, West Virginia, and the southern part of Virginia leave men at a disadvantage during those negotiations.
States with a standard custody schedule of every other weekend put men at a disadvantage in those negotiations.
Every other weekend is still the standard visitation in many states. That alone leaves men at a disadvantage in negotiations. States force unmarried fathers to go to court to guarantee access, signing the affidavit of paternity or similar isn’t enough.
I never made the claim that courts are making the majority of decisions anywhere. The courts bias in either direction depends on location and judge. Which is a SYSTEM problem.