Signs of the Times.....REmarriage/Discrimination/the POLITICS OF PARENTHOOD (OR, NOT) - 5/16/10

[Smartmarriages]

-  IT'S COMPLICATED, IN REAL LIFE.  WHEN PARENTS REMARRY (EACH OTHER)
- ON LEARNING SOMETHING EVERY DAY: COUGARS AND SUCH
- 3 ARTICLES ON A THEME: THE POLITICS OF HAVING CHILDREN
- NEW BABY BOOM FOSTERS CULTURE CLASH
- THEN COMES THE MARRIAGE QUESTION: KAGAN
- GOP HAS BIG IDEAS - UNDER WRAPS
--------------------------------------------

-  IT'S COMPLICATED, IN REAL LIFE.  WHEN PARENTS REMARRY (EACH OTHER)

NY Times, May 12, 2010

. . . Such stories cannot be chronicled precisely, placed in a system of
causes and effects, but their re-love seems to have had the same onset
pattern of sleep: gradually and then all at once. My parents had enough
history to weather the mishegoss of divorce and explore the possibility of a
relationship once again. Emotional history does not go away. It¹s
relentless. In the face of all the ³it¹s complicated² status my parents may
face in their second go at marriage, they are fearlessly moving forward. . .
. .

For the full article: http://tinyurl.com/2ashpdh

------------------------------------------
- ON LEARNING SOMETHING EVERY DAY: COUGARS AND SUCH

I seriously didn't realize Cougar was a derogatory term.  Seriously.  Just
shows I'm out of it, or as one of you put it "insensitive".  I've never seen
Cougar Town and thought the term was a sign of women's equality/empowerment.
Used the header *Cougar's Die Young*....about the marital research which I
thought was fascinating, that, unlike men, women live longer if they marry
men close to their own age.  Well I hit a nerve using that term and received
a bunch of angry emails and unsubscribes.  Then, because the universe works
this way, saw this article in today's NY Times Style section explaining that
*Cougar* is a term that is both gender and age discriminatory, so much so
that Google is blocking its use.  I stand educated.

This Life
Google Tells Sites for ŒCougars¹ to Go Prowl Elsewhere
Sarah Kershaw
NY Times, May 16, 2010

. . . . With television shows like ³Cougar Town,² many movie plots based on
these May-December romances (not always portraying cougars in a positive
light) and a steady stream of tabloid reports on the comings and goings of
celebrities like Demi Moore, the concept has taken hold in pop culture.

But that¹s a far cry from a societal stamp of approval. Experts on female
sexuality and women¹s history say Google¹s decision provides a glimpse into
a pervasive discomfort with older women as sexually active players on the
dating scene. 

³It¹s relatively new that women have felt O.K. to be sexual and be
attractive and continue to be alive in that way as they aged,² said Lonnie
Barbach, a psychologist in San Francisco who specializes in  female
sexuality and relationships. ³It¹s always been an acceptable part of culture
for men to be sexual at all ages and all levels.²

Last week, CougarLife.com, which was paying Google $100,000 a month to
manage its advertising and place it on content pages, was notified by the
company that its ads, which had been appearing since October,  would no
longer be accepted.   . . . .

. . . . Mr. Koshy of CougarLife.com said his site was, however, continuing
to advertise on Facebook, spending $100,000 monthly. Facebook, he said, had
objected to some specific content of proposed ads  but had not objected to
the cougar concept.

For the full article: http://tinyurl.com/2vfsx6m

Must say, these last paragraphs points to another way I'm out of it.  No
wonder we can't get Smart Marriages across to the public.....now what I need
to do is find a Sugar Daddy who will cough up $200,000 a month to advertise
my site.  - diane 

--------------------------------------------------
- AND, 3 ARTICLES ON A THEME: THE POLITICS OF HAVING CHILDREN


Same day, three articles in NY Times and Wash Post, which, to me at least,
all hit on the politics of having kids ­ or, not. - diane

- NEW BABY BOOM FOSTERS CULTURE CLASH: PARENTS VS PUBLIC SPACES
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Washington Post, front page, May 16, 2010

. . .  . Politicians and planners have heralded the return of young families
to such areas as Washington, Boston and New York as a sign of resurgence.
But as the ranks of parents and their tykes have swelled, so, too, has
resentment over having to accommodate them in public places. Skirmishes have
erupted on buses, in parks, on playing fields and in bars. Often, the
conflicts pit parents against childless adults who, after decades of
middle-class flight, have gotten used to the sense that they have the city
to themselves. 

Through the first eight years of this century, according to District
officials, children under 5 have made up a growing proportion of the city's
population.  . . . 

------------------------------------------
- THEN COMES THE MARRIAGE QUESTION: KAGAN
 This one is in the NOTICED column of Sunday's NY Times Style section that
*notices* that Kagan, like Sotomayor, are single and childless and asks
about the message to young career women: does success require that they make
a choice to forego having a traditional family?
Full column: http://tinyurl.com/26ly459

---------------------------------------
- GOP HAS BIG IDEAS - UNDER WRAPS
Conservative thinkers tout three innovative and controversial proposals:
Parental Tax Cut; Marriage Insurance; Eyeing entitlement programs
Perry Bacon Jr.
Sunday, May 16, 2010

Billboards advertising the importance of marriage. Shifting coverage of the
elderly from Medicare to private insurance companies. Big tax cuts
specifically for parents.

Conservative thinkers are touting those bold ideas and others in journals,
op-ed pages and blogs. While the "tea party" movement has dominated public
attention, small blocs of Republicans have quietly spent the past year
crafting policies on a wide range of issues, looking to build support if the
GOP regains control of Congress or the presidency. . . . .

. . . Robert Stein, a conservative economist who served as deputy assistant
secretary for macroeconomic analysis in George W. Bush's administration,
says the tax code is unfair to one particular group of Americans: parents.

He says that parents invest thousands of dollars in raising members of
society who eventually fund programs such as Social Security and Medicare,
but retirees who chose not to raise children get the same old-age benefits
as those who did. 

"Once a country adopts an old-age pension system, it creates an implicit
bias against raising children," Stein said. "One of the natural reasons for
raising children is not just because you like kids, but to take care of
yourself in old age. Once a country gives everybody access to everyone
else's kids' money, it undermines the natural economic incentive to raise
kids." 

Under current law, parents with children get a $1,000 tax credit plus a tax
exemption for each child, saving a typical middle-class family of four about
$1,550 per child. 

Stein would replace this system with a $4,000-per-child tax credit. That
parental tax credit would be funded in part through Stein's other big idea:
Simplify the personal income tax to two brackets -- one that taxes 15
percent of income and the other 35 percent. He estimates that few people now
in the 10 percent bracket would pay more if they move to 15 percent, because
of the child exemption. . . .  .


. . .  .Conservatives have long touted the importance of marriage. Bush even
established a "HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITIATIVE" that created small federal
grants for pilot programs to help couples strengthen their marriages. (That
funding expires next year, and President Obama created a pilot program
FOCUSED ON FATHERHOOD TO REPLACE IT.)

Much of the energy from conservatives went to promoting marriage as a
cultural virtue. But Bradford Wilcox, a professor of sociology at the
University of Virginia, says that it is important to highlight the economic
benefits of marriage.

The divorce rate among college-educated Americans has dropped since the
1980s, but the rate has increased among people without college degrees. This
creates what he calls a "marriage gap" that denies lower-income people the
advantages of marriage if they, for example, get laid off from their jobs.

"We need to appreciate that marriage is more than an emotional connection
between two people," Wilcox said. "There are kids; it's a kind of economic
cooperation, a form of social insurance."

Wilcox says churches, the entertainment industry and other cultural
institutions would have to embrace this view of marriage, not just the
government. He proposes federal funding for public-service announcements and
other social marketing to promote marriage, modeled on anti-smoking
campaigns. 

And to discourage divorce, he says, states should change marriage laws so
spouses who are being divorced against their will and have not engaged in
abuse or adultery would be given preferential treatment by family courts in
determining alimony, child support and custody of children.

For the full article: http://tinyurl.com/25kyuyl

-----------------------------------------------
- FOR INFORMATION about how to post to the Smart Marriages® newslist;
subscribe or UNSUBSCRIBE, or an archive of all past posts:
http://www.smartmarriages.com/newslist.info.html