So why say the article was to get fairness for both mums and non mums.
You say mums exploit you? Really? Exploit? You say you recognise the unfairness in society that mum are expected to pick up most childcare and appear to sympathise and say mums exploited you.
Where in the article did it say that the main problem was that company didn’t staff your store correctly, give you the tools to manage people calling in sick all the time, didn’t support you. Or had expectations that were exploitative especially at Christmas? Wouldn’t it have been better to call out the companies that are doing this? Why not call out your employer?
The only way things change is if employers change. Which is why I am ensuring it happens in our company and will do the same when I move to the next.
I actually know someone who worked for the same store. They are abysmal. But that article isn’t changing anything where the change needs to happen
There is not a chance in 30 years of retail you never came across someone who called in sick on key days, didn’t pull their weight, called in sick because they couldn’t be bothered that also didn’t have kids.
Your issue is with people who take jobs knowing they can’t work as expected and your company policy and expectations and support of you managing them.
So again, don’t come here pretending it wasn’t meant as an attack on working mothers and you just want fairness for all women. You, purposely, attacked a group of women for self promotion. Don’t come here and think you must be more intelligent that mn users and can convince them you don’t mean for it to come across that way and manipulate them into believe evil working mums are out in their support groups figuring out how to exploit non parents. As I said, I am sure there are plenty of entitled parents. But I am also sure there are plenty of entitled non parents as well, because I have seen it myself.
There is no way this makes anything better. That wasn’t your intention. It maybe you eventual intention with your website. But Your intention with this article was to attack a group of women to create click bait, for your own gain. If anything it creates more of a divide.
you aren’t owning it. You are kind of owning it. Because it’s based on actual events but loosely. But denying your intention. You wrote and article with an elbowed women hater to drive people to your FB page so you can advertise your website. It’s really that simple.
It’s like me saying over 50s ruined my career because they are often caring for older people and a few of them have been entitled and manipulated their care responsibilities. So therefore people over 50 exploit me.