You did not even respond to the question. You mentioned that 2 words with different spellings are in fact 2 words with different spellings. Then you avoided the question by appealing to a crabs-in-a-bucket mentality saying someone else would "get it" and you wouldn't.
Neither of these respond to the question - how would this hurt men without children? How would this actually take anything away from them?
My understanding is that this is supposed to apply to men (as well as women) so I don't any way this would be a drawback.
What do you think happens when companies have to give more leave? I'll tell you what happens, they adjust salaries downwards, especially for new hires.
I did not argue an opinion. I explained to you why the OP would believe government-mandated paid leave gives men without children the shaft.
I hope you have found this answer useful. Your feedback will help me improve future responses! BEEP-BOOP
You did not even respond to the question. You mentioned that 2 words with different spellings are in fact 2 words with different spellings. Then you avoided the question by appealing to a crabs-in-a-bucket mentality saying someone else would "get it" and you wouldn't.
Neither of these respond to the question - how would this hurt men without children? How would this actually take anything away from them?
My understanding is that this is supposed to apply to men (as well as women) so I don't any way this would be a drawback.
Because they are without children.
What do you think happens when companies have to give more leave? I'll tell you what happens, they adjust salaries downwards, especially for new hires.
Absolutely nothing.
This is as fake as a feminist rape story.