I probably should have included Regifans quote! I'm with you on this. The freezing of embryos allows women to have that flexability. There a several forms of cancer out there that render women infertile. The harvesting and storing off eggs is an invaluable option for women who may have a condition that affects their ability to conceive later in life. Not just to be able to tie them to an office!
At a still child bearing age my cousin had non-malignant tumors wrapped around her ovaries. The doctors initially thought that they could save her ovaries, but once they went in there was no saving them. With a program like this it would've possible for her to still bear children.
Women should be parenting in their 20s. 30s, the latest.
So tired of this self righteous bullshit that has been programmed into woman to skip family life in favor of a job. A boring, meaningless money generating job.
Don't kid yourself people, these women aren't aspiring to their dreams. They are getting jobs, like everyone else. Nothing special.
Wanna do something really special? Be a parent. Be a mother, like you were designed to be.
Freezing your eggs so you can spend your prime doing some bullshit job, and save that annoying inconvenience known as parenting for later in life? Fucking disgusting.
Wow. What a douchey comment. It's harder to start a career later in life.
Tying healthcare benefits to employment is stupid. Access to healthcare should be a universal right regardless of employment status, with timely and free (or at the very least affordable) basic care for citizens. This is exactly this kind of reason why governments exist to leverage bulk purchasing power and centralised decision making to drive down costs.
Privatising healthcare drives profit-based activities and leaves our most vulnerable to delay seeking treatment early, which amplifies the costs for individuals and society.
Companies exist solely to make a profit. All of the other stuff is incidental in that pursuit and it really doesn't matter how it is downplayed or dressed up. Without that profit there is no possibility of "perks". The "work-life" trend is just the latest gibberish to fall from the mouths of workers who are blind to the simplicity of their financial arrangement. They are there to provide a financial advantage to their employer. When they no longer provide a benefit, they're gone.
That's one side of the "how to make a profit" coin. The other is where the worker is so talented and adds so much value that the employer is scrambling to add benefits so they can maintain the profits they're enjoying because of the employee. Obviously, mega-kitchens and on-site hair salons can be sold to the employees as benefits, while increasing corporate profits since employees are more likely to stay on site.
These top tech companies operate on this side of the coin. Well, most of Apple's employees are retail, and those folks are generally disposable, but the design and engineering side is going to be all about retention of the best.
My point is that these benefits create pressure to work more, causing employees to ask for benefits that make it easier for them to work more. Working more increases profits for the company, so yeah, that's the motivation. And it results in women asking to have their eggs frozen.
C'mon, you made a sweeping assertion, ignoring an entire sweep of human history where time and again, we have shown the ability to innovate and adapt -- and many, many before you, starting at least with Malthus, have had to suck eggs making similar arguments -- and you can't provide your argument?!
Agreed -- it has been a scare tactic used in various forms in attempts to control/manipulate society and procreation for centuries.
I just had an in-depth discussion with a friend of mine working in the food & agriculture industry the other day discussing the merits of cricket farming. Near zero energy usage and very little land required to provide a sustainable food source. As you stated: innovate and adapt.
I am shaking my head, wondering how this thread got to be so misogynistic.
I am sorry, but I've got to come out and say this: The heated arguments here sound like a bunch of gonads talking to each other over an issue about which they're utterly clueless by gender, biology, personal relationships, and experience.
I am shaking my head, wondering how this thread got to be so misogynistic.
I am sorry, but I've got to come out and say this: The heated arguments here sound like a bunch of gonads talking to each other over an issue about which they're utterly clueless by gender, biology, personal relationships, and experience.
Well said. It won't be until a loved one suddenly becomes infertile for some here to understand the benefits of this.
And this is a good idea because? Encouraging women to have babies later in life doesn't seem like s good thing to me. How about providing better work/life balance so employees aren't stuck working nights, weekends or being on call 24/7.
If work/life balance (a.k.a. working fewer hours) were a big priority, you could find better places to work than Apple. But this seems like an interesting option for high-achiever types who want to pursue an opportunity with a top company without sacrificing their eventual family goals. I imagine many of these people will also make great parents when the time is right.
BTW I didn't see anything in the article that said Apple was "encouraging" women to take this option. On the contrary, the article suggests Apple is offering it to meet a demand for more fertility options.
Apple can simply pay ALL their employees $20k extra a year so at least it would be fair...
I agree. My wife works for a NON-PROFIT and they offer unbelievably expensive fertility treatments. One employee used the feature numerous times to the tune of several hundred thousand dollars. What did she get? She lost every pregnancy and almost died (not exaggerating) miscarrying the last one. They finally decided to use a surrogate - not sure if the organization paid that that as well. What did the non-breeders or the fertile ones get out of all this besides hearing the drama over and over from the employee? Nothing, zip, el squatto AND much higher insurance premiums. In my mind this will always be an unfair situation since lack of fertility is not really a life threatening condition and thus does not deserve coverage. Freezing eggs kind of feels the same here in that it gets the males and non-breeding females a big fat zero in benefit. Apple certainly can afford it a lot more than a non-profit, but it still rubs me the wrong way.
Freezing eggs kind of feels the same here in that it gets the males and non-breeding females a big fat zero in benefit. Apple certainly can afford it a lot more than a non-profit, but it still rubs me the wrong way.
You mean non-breeding males. If you're married to a woman who needs this service, and want kids, then this is your benefit too.
Do you feel the same way about family medical leave for child birth?
You mean non-breeding males. If you're married to a woman who needs this service, and want kids, then this is your benefit too.
Do you feel the same way about family medical leave for child birth?
Correct - thanks. No, leave for child birth is good for the well being of the child and parents. It probably should be equal for both parents however and I wouldn't call it medical leave. It's just something that everyone should be granted by law so that it is applied equally and fairly. Shouldn't matter where you are employed.
This simply shows that the way Apple (and most other companies world wide) allow for career development and motherhood is below the standard that it should be.
On a side note, every career orientated woman should make sure that discussing career development and parenting responsibilites is a priority before they chose a life partner. One day we may reach a stage where men bring this up, but until then...
Comments
At a still child bearing age my cousin had non-malignant tumors wrapped around her ovaries. The doctors initially thought that they could save her ovaries, but once they went in there was no saving them. With a program like this it would've possible for her to still bear children.
Wow. What a douchey comment. It's harder to start a career later in life.
Who's gonna pay for it?
Apple doesn't own the eggs. I'm sure the woman would have to pay for storage/maintenance costs after leaving Apple.
Apple doesn't own the eggs. I'm sure the woman would have to pay for storage/maintenance costs after leaving Apple.
It was a joke.
Ok sorry. I wasn't sure compared to other comments on the thread.
Companies exist solely to make a profit. All of the other stuff is incidental in that pursuit and it really doesn't matter how it is downplayed or dressed up. Without that profit there is no possibility of "perks". The "work-life" trend is just the latest gibberish to fall from the mouths of workers who are blind to the simplicity of their financial arrangement. They are there to provide a financial advantage to their employer. When they no longer provide a benefit, they're gone.
That's one side of the "how to make a profit" coin. The other is where the worker is so talented and adds so much value that the employer is scrambling to add benefits so they can maintain the profits they're enjoying because of the employee. Obviously, mega-kitchens and on-site hair salons can be sold to the employees as benefits, while increasing corporate profits since employees are more likely to stay on site.
These top tech companies operate on this side of the coin. Well, most of Apple's employees are retail, and those folks are generally disposable, but the design and engineering side is going to be all about retention of the best.
My point is that these benefits create pressure to work more, causing employees to ask for benefits that make it easier for them to work more. Working more increases profits for the company, so yeah, that's the motivation. And it results in women asking to have their eggs frozen.
It was a joke.
Ok sorry. I wasn't sure compared to other comments on the thread.
No problem.
C'mon, you made a sweeping assertion, ignoring an entire sweep of human history where time and again, we have shown the ability to innovate and adapt -- and many, many before you, starting at least with Malthus, have had to suck eggs making similar arguments -- and you can't provide your argument?!
Agreed -- it has been a scare tactic used in various forms in attempts to control/manipulate society and procreation for centuries.
I just had an in-depth discussion with a friend of mine working in the food & agriculture industry the other day discussing the merits of cricket farming. Near zero energy usage and very little land required to provide a sustainable food source. As you stated: innovate and adapt.
I am shaking my head, wondering how this thread got to be so misogynistic.
I am sorry, but I've got to come out and say this: The heated arguments here sound like a bunch of gonads talking to each other over an issue about which they're utterly clueless by gender, biology, personal relationships, and experience.
Well said. It won't be until a loved one suddenly becomes infertile for some here to understand the benefits of this.
All your egg are belong to us
You forgot 'poached'.
And curate's.
And this is a good idea because? Encouraging women to have babies later in life doesn't seem like s good thing to me. How about providing better work/life balance so employees aren't stuck working nights, weekends or being on call 24/7.
If work/life balance (a.k.a. working fewer hours) were a big priority, you could find better places to work than Apple. But this seems like an interesting option for high-achiever types who want to pursue an opportunity with a top company without sacrificing their eventual family goals. I imagine many of these people will also make great parents when the time is right.
BTW I didn't see anything in the article that said Apple was "encouraging" women to take this option. On the contrary, the article suggests Apple is offering it to meet a demand for more fertility options.
Apple can simply pay ALL their employees $20k extra a year so at least it would be fair...
I agree. My wife works for a NON-PROFIT and they offer unbelievably expensive fertility treatments. One employee used the feature numerous times to the tune of several hundred thousand dollars. What did she get? She lost every pregnancy and almost died (not exaggerating) miscarrying the last one. They finally decided to use a surrogate - not sure if the organization paid that that as well. What did the non-breeders or the fertile ones get out of all this besides hearing the drama over and over from the employee? Nothing, zip, el squatto AND much higher insurance premiums. In my mind this will always be an unfair situation since lack of fertility is not really a life threatening condition and thus does not deserve coverage. Freezing eggs kind of feels the same here in that it gets the males and non-breeding females a big fat zero in benefit. Apple certainly can afford it a lot more than a non-profit, but it still rubs me the wrong way.
Only Facebook and Apple offer this perk for women, so I see it as a hedge against the competition for both of them.
Freezing eggs kind of feels the same here in that it gets the males and non-breeding females a big fat zero in benefit. Apple certainly can afford it a lot more than a non-profit, but it still rubs me the wrong way.
You mean non-breeding males. If you're married to a woman who needs this service, and want kids, then this is your benefit too.
Do you feel the same way about family medical leave for child birth?
You mean non-breeding males. If you're married to a woman who needs this service, and want kids, then this is your benefit too.
Do you feel the same way about family medical leave for child birth?
Correct - thanks. No, leave for child birth is good for the well being of the child and parents. It probably should be equal for both parents however and I wouldn't call it medical leave. It's just something that everyone should be granted by law so that it is applied equally and fairly. Shouldn't matter where you are employed.
This simply shows that the way Apple (and most other companies world wide) allow for career development and motherhood is below the standard that it should be.
On a side note, every career orientated woman should make sure that discussing career development and parenting responsibilites is a priority before they chose a life partner. One day we may reach a stage where men bring this up, but until then...
I have a strong suspicion that you have a lot of trouble communicating with or are afraid of women, thus the desire to control them.
These views are extremely immature.
Are you sure we’re reading the same post? PMZ’s dead on.
Are you sure we’re reading the same post? PMZ’s dead on.
But Spam Sandwich pulled a Godwin. Are you allowed to reply to him?