Unpopular Opinions Thread

[Guest]

55 minutes ago, Katy M said:

So, no, Ben didn't have a point, because he didn't know what, if any, Jack's objections would be.

That's the thing about opinions... None of them are the 'right' ones.  Interesting how differently we all see it.  

I thought the monologue was totally uncalled for.  I feel like Ben can speak in the hypothetical about Jack objecting whether he has or not yet.  Rebecca seemed to fear it.  I think his point was that a very supportive spouse would try to make it work.  I tend to agree.  

[chocolatine]

1 hour ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

He also said, "Who does she think she is?  Janis freakin Joplin?  We have three teenagers at home!"  Which to me suggests he thinks Rebecca's place is in the home.

But that was their arrangement. Jack works 10-12 hours a day to take care of the family financially, and Rebecca is a full-time mother and home maker. They *both* made sacrifices. He was supportive when she started singing locally and even rearranged his schedule so he can be there for  Kevin and Randall's football games, but Rebecca being entirely absent for a month puts too much burden on him. It's not like Rebecca's singing brings in enough money for Jack to cut back on his hours, he still has to work 10-12 hours a day *and* do a lot more at home. He has the right to be unhappy about that.

[SlackerInc]

Yeah, I think they perhaps unwittingly stacked the deck a little bit too far in that direction by having the trip be for a month. Being gone for a week would be a better balance between  family disruption and her singing career.  [Edited to clarify: Jack could still be bent out of shape about a weeklong trip with Ben, but when they argued about it Rebecca would have a better case.] Even if it were the primary breadwinner going out of town for a month on a business trip, that is pretty extreme. The parents I know who take business trips keep it to a week or less, generally.

Unless she is earning a substantial amount of money from her music, then what someone said upthread is also a good point: if she can leave for a month and not cause major problems, then what was she really doing to contribute to the family before?

Edited February 17, 2017 by SlackerInc

[ShadowFacts]

1 hour ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

I thought the monologue was totally uncalled for.  I feel like Ben can speak in the hypothetical about Jack objecting whether he has or not yet.  Rebecca seemed to fear it.  I think his point was that a very supportive spouse would try to make it work.  I tend to agree.  

I agree with his point, but not how he made it and in fact don't think it was his to make.  Really none of his business how they work it out between them.

30 minutes ago, SlackerInc said:

Unless she is earning a substantial amount of money from her music, then what someone said upthread is also a good point: if she can leave for a month and not cause major problems, then what was she really doing to contribute to the family before?

I had mentioned that the kids were having their teen problems with her right there, and Jack was hands-on enough that he could handle the stuff for a month.  But that doesn't mean she wasn't really doing anything to contribute to the family -- far from it.  And a month's absence could go quite a long way toward Jack appreciating just how much she does, and the kids, too.  I would actually like to see it play out that way. 

[Kohola3]

38 minutes ago, SlackerInc said:

Unless she is earning a substantial amount of money from her music, then what someone said upthread is also a good point: if she can leave for a month and not cause major problems, then what was she really doing to contribute to the family before?

I hope you mean financially because you are likely to be asking for a shitstorm of retorts from stay at home moms on her "contribution".  How about cooking, cleaning, shopping, laundry, schlepping all three kids to their various activities and doctor/dentist appointments, managing finances, refereeing sibling fights, keeping track of everyone's schedule and being available all hours of the day when Jack was at work?

[Diana Berry]

I'm confused about the teenage Randall.  We saw him a while back as a tough football player pushing a Kevin around on the football field.  This week , we see him completely anxiety ridden.  Did I miss something?

[Court]

You can be a football player and have anxiety. They're not mutually exclusive. On most days, you would have no idea the anxiety I'm feeling. Or that I suffer from panic attacks very similar to Randall's.

Often, I can do xyz but still have extreme anxiety while doing xyz.

[Wings]

I love Chrissy Metz, I have seen her interviewed several times.  She must be a very good actor because she was chosen above all other plus sized women for the role.  Chrissy's kind of heavy is not the zaftig body type we see most often in films and TV.   She carries her weight in a very awkward way.  I mean NO criticism at all. 

I am making note because it is extremely unusual.    You can watch the show in this link.   It has some tid bits about This is Us. 

http://www.bravotv.com/watch-what-happens-live-with-andy-cohen/season-14/chrissy-metz-adam-lambert

 

 

Edited February 17, 2017 by wings707

[chocolatine]

1 hour ago, Kohola3 said:

I hope you mean financially because you are likely to be asking for a shitstorm of retorts from stay at home moms on her "contribution".  How about cooking, cleaning, shopping, laundry, schlepping all three kids to their various activities and doctor/dentist appointments, managing finances, refereeing sibling fights, keeping track of everyone's schedule and being available all hours of the day when Jack was at work?

No, the opinion posted upthread and/or in the episode thread was "so what if she leaves for a month? Jack should be able to manage without her". So then the question is, if it's supposedly that easy for Jack to manage without her (after working 10-12 hours a day, no less), how important/valuable has her contribution been in the first place.

[birkenstock]

Anyone can have anxiety, it doesn't mean that they aren't mentally or physically tough.  Kevin had pre-play anxiety to a lesser extent when he called Kate for validation, went to Randall's office and visited Rebecca and Miguel's house.  Randall's anxiety manifests in an extreme physical response that can be difficult to control unless redirected.  I think that Randall viewed football as a way to bond with Kevin (though that didn't work out), it was lower stakes than his academic competition with his classmate.    

It would have been helpful if Jack and Rebecca had put Randall in therapy when the panic attacks first started.  A therapist would have taught Randall how to self-regulate and breathing techniques to minimize the panic attacks.  They would still happen but knowing how to control them or that they were temporary to make him feel less powerless.     

Edited February 17, 2017 by birkenstock

[kili]

Quote

 And a month's absence could go quite a long way toward Jack appreciating just how much she does, and the kids, too.  I would actually like to see it play out that way. 

And then he should get a month to pursue his heart's desire while she earns all the money to support the family and appreciate how much he does?

I don't get it. If Jack is supposed to accept her going away for a month to appreciate what she does, why is there no appreciation that he does have to do more (plus his usual job) while she is away?

He already appreciates all that she does at home. That's the initial reason why he doesn't want her to go away.  But he decides he is willing to sacrifice so she can have some "me" time for a month - he just grumbles a bit about it at work.

Rebecca does play a big role in the family. Recognizing that Jack has been handed a lot of extra work is recognizing that she does contribute to the family.

Edited February 18, 2017 by kili

[ShadowFacts]

7 minutes ago, kili said:

And then he should get a month to pursue his heart's desire while she earns all the money to support the family and appreciate how much he does?

I don't get it. If Jack is supposed to accept her going away for a month to appreciate what she does, why is there no appreciation that he does have to do more (plus his usual job) while she is away?

He already appreciate all that she does at home. That's the initial reason why he doesn't want her to go away.  But he decides he is willing to sacrifice so she can have some "me" time for a month - he just grumbles a bit about it at work.

I don't know that she is not appreciating what more he has to do.  I didn't see that.  Nor is it that he doesn't appreciate what she's doing now.  She's been dealing with the day-to-day for 16 years and now he can have a better handle on what that entails.  As for her giving him a month to do what he wants -- it's not necessarily tit for tat.  I think it's not so much about who has to sacrifice more.  In the recent episode, we saw that his jealousy and possessiveness is pretty much now driving him.  It's a month, a one-time deal.  Anybody can make some extra effort for a period of time for their partner pursuing something important to them.  If it became something frequent, or lengthy, that's a whole different story and would have to be discussed.  He apparently was agreeable, maybe reluctantly, and now his insecurities about this Ben guy are what is rankling him more so than extra work.  That's the way it came across to me, anyway. 

[kili]

Quote

I don't know that she is not appreciating what more he has to do. 

I think that Rebecca does appreciate that Jack will have more work to do. That's why she is having second thoughts, making lists and trying to pre-prepare things.

UO: I like Sanjay. Sure, he got competitive with Randall when Randall decided to make things a competition, but I thought it was very kind in the sympathetic, no fuss method he took over that meeting when Randall fell apart.

[HeyThere83]

9 hours ago, Cattitude said:

I'm glad I found a place to vent my UO. I don't like Kevin and have little sympathy for him. I find him to invent problems of his own making to get attention. Kevin is one of three children who has all the luck, while his siblings have real problems. He is jealous of their real problems so he acts out to get attention. Randall and Kate need more of their parents time b/c they have real issues. Kevin has a good life and is popular and well liked....poor baby. ugh! I just have no sympathy for him. His siblings have successful lived despite adversity. He has a successful life but seems to keep sabotaging it and playing a victim when he has a GOOD life. Why again should I feel bad for him.

I just don't find his parents not giving him as much attention something to feel sorry about. I don't feel they love him any less he just doesn't have REAL problems. More attention doesn't equal more love, you give each child the amount of attention needed and that doesn't equal loving one more than the other. I've never seen his parents not include him in parties, outing or the fun. I find they love him as much as Kate and Randall so I can't feel sorry he doesn't have problems in his life. He seems golden to me. Why should I feel sorry for that.

I most certainly agree. This story is so poorly executed.

[SlackerInc]

I find myself liking posts on both sides of arguments because you're all making good points.

4 hours ago, Kohola3 said:

I hope you mean financially because you are likely to be asking for a shitstorm of retorts from stay at home moms on her "contribution".  How about cooking, cleaning, shopping, laundry, schlepping all three kids to their various activities and doctor/dentist appointments, managing finances, refereeing sibling fights, keeping track of everyone's schedule and being available all hours of the day when Jack was at work?

I did not mean financially, but I am a stay-at-home parent myself. It seems like Chocolatine understood what I meant:

2 hours ago, chocolatine said:

No, the opinion posted upthread and/or in the episode thread was "so what if she leaves for a month? Jack should be able to manage without her". So then the question is, if it's supposedly that easy for Jack to manage without her (after working 10-12 hours a day, no less), how important/valuable has her contribution been in the first place.

Right.  I was more scoffing at the idea that it shouldn't be a problem for Jack to cover for all her contributions to the family economy while still working full-time outside the home.

[Guest]

I'm a single mother who has traveled internationally for business and I don't think it's asking too much at all for Jack to do it on his own for a month.  The kids are old enough to bum rides, do their own laundry, fix their own food, pretty much everything.  If they can't get a ride to practice on the occasions Jack can't get home on time a couple nights a week, miss practice.  It's a month in spring.  Football will be there in fall.  Friends' parents are usually happy to help.  Hell, Rebecca could probably orchestrate the whole thing before leaving and/or on the road.  It's what I'd do.  And how many hours does a singing gig take?  3 a day max?  

When it gets tricky is when both parents travel.  Jack is home every night.  If it's 'the work' he's got a problem with, he should have his dad card taken away.  I don't think it's the work.  He's superdad.  I think he's just possessive and insecure.

[CleoCaesar]

1 hour ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

The kids are old enough to bum rides, do their own laundry, fix their own food, pretty much everything.

Hear, hear! The whole But what about the children?!?! handwringing is just baffling to me. I grew up in 2 cultures, American and Eastern European, and even as a teen it always struck me how...helpless...most American kids/teens are portrayed on TV. I dismissed that that could be true in real life until I got to college and my peers couldn't do their own laundry, cook a simple meal, manage basic finances, and other Life 101 stuff. That was just so not the case with the European friends, who were riding the subway alone across major metropolises to get to school every day in middle school and beyond, making dinner for their families, doing laundry when necessary, etc.

Like the standard "making and packing the kids their lunches" trope - what teenager is incapable of making a sandwich and putting it into a bag to take with them to school? Or how mothers on TV are doing endless loads of laundry - hi, it's not the Middle Ages, just have the kid toss it in the washer/dryer you have in your own house.

Randall, Kate, and Kevin are, what, 15-16 when Rebecca goes on tour? That's not a young child who really does need a parent's help for things. I have no idea why Jack would need to rearrange his life to accommodate a month of his wife being absent.

[jhlipton]

On 2/16/2017 at 9:19 AM, SlackerInc said:

I missed it too--I don't think it exists .  I was referring to the way she spoke to him, not suggesting she had to let him stay forever.   I won't claim to be as clever a wordsmith as Judith Martin, but I'm imagining her saying something like "Kevin, dear, you must be terribly uncomfortable on that couch. I've got some free time this afternoon: why don't we go together and look for a more suitable place where you can work and sleep in comfort."

ETA:  And if he responds by saying that he's just fine on the couch, then she comes back with something like "oh you're so sweet to say so, but I'm not having any of it. I've slept on that couch and I won't subject you to it a single night longer. Come along now, we're going to go find you a nice place this moment."

I think a "Bless your heart" in either quote would be wonderful -- Beth is from the South, isn't she?

[ShadowFacts]

13 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

When it gets tricky is when both parents travel.  Jack is home every night.  If it's 'the work' he's got a problem with, he should have his dad card taken away.  I don't think it's the work.  He's superdad.  I think he's just possessive and insecure.

That's the way it looked to me, and we haven't seen that side of him before, prior to this his devotion just looked like devotion.  I was thinking that maybe there is another layer to this yet to be revealed -- why he got so very reactive about not knowing the guy was a former boyfriend briefly.  So far we haven't seen Rebecca tell Jack she knows all about William.  Maybe this revelation happened and we haven't seen it yet in flashback.  That would give him extra touchiness about her not telling him the whole truth.  The trust would be shakier.

[Katy M]

12 hours ago, CleoCaesar said:

Like the standard "making and packing the kids their lunches" trope - what teenager is incapable of making a sandwich and putting it into a bag to take with them to school

I agree with everything you said.  Just wanted to say, sometimes packing the kids lunch is more about wanting to manage the food inventory than because kid can't do it.  Also, I do have to say, I don't know anyone in college who couldn't/didn't do their own laundry once there.

 

12 hours ago, jhlipton said:

I think a "Bless your heart" in either quote would be wonderful -- Beth is from the South, isn't she?

See, and I'm thinking I would rather someone just say to me "when are you leaving" or "how long will you be here" instead of obviously patronizing me.

[Wings]

Interesting.  I was talking to a neighbor this morning about this show.  She binged watched all episodes up until now, as I did.  We shared the exact same take on Randall!   I think my theory is correct.  We loved the Toby/Chrissy relationship and the format of past and present at once but walked away disliking Randall.  We both felt assaulted (verbal shorthand) by his anger, strident attitude and nastiness toward his wife and daughter on top of only having known William a short time.  

Here concludes my theory on binge watching this show.  You're welcome.  :^)

Edited February 18, 2017 by wings707

[Guest]

54 minutes ago, wings707 said:

nastiness toward his wife and daughter

Remind me what this was?  Not doubting you, I just don't remember him being nasty to them.  Was it about the chess tourney?  Oh, I thought he was a bit nasty to Beth in the drug store over her prescriptions/bc issue, and having a secret retirement plan  

[PRgal]

18 hours ago, CleoCaesar said:

Hear, hear! The whole But what about the children?!?! handwringing is just baffling to me. I grew up in 2 cultures, American and Eastern European, and even as a teen it always struck me how...helpless...most American kids/teens are portrayed on TV. I dismissed that that could be true in real life until I got to college and my peers couldn't do their own laundry, cook a simple meal, manage basic finances, and other Life 101 stuff. That was just so not the case with the European friends, who were riding the subway alone across major metropolises to get to school every day in middle school and beyond, making dinner for their families, doing laundry when necessary, etc.

Like the standard "making and packing the kids their lunches" trope - what teenager is incapable of making a sandwich and putting it into a bag to take with them to school? Or how mothers on TV are doing endless loads of laundry - hi, it's not the Middle Ages, just have the kid toss it in the washer/dryer you have in your own house.

Randall, Kate, and Kevin are, what, 15-16 when Rebecca goes on tour? That's not a young child who really does need a parent's help for things. I have no idea why Jack would need to rearrange his life to accommodate a month of his wife being absent.

Some parents just don't believe it's "appropriate" for kids to do anything other than minimal chores and study.  My grandmother even told me it was "inappropriate" for a lady to be in the kitchen, thus, I never learned how to properly cook.  And unlike other kids of immigrant parents/grandparents, I have no true cultural recipes to carry on with me.  My grandmother was like that with my mom, too.  When my mom first got to Canada, she didn't even know how to boil an egg.  And yes, my grandmother practically freaked out when my mom tried to make me do laundry.  I mean, I had to learn before moving to campus, right? 

Note:  I'm around the same age as the Big Three (a year older, in fact - almost to the day). 

Edited February 18, 2017 by PRgal

[Wings]

1 hour ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

Remind me what this was?  Not doubting you, I just don't remember him being nasty to them.  Was it about the chess tourney?  Oh, I thought he was a bit nasty to Beth in the drug store over her prescriptions/bc issue, and having a secret retirement plan  

I cannot give you a specific example.  I remember thinking, that is your daughter, be kind, this isn't all about you.  Sorry that is all I got.  It was a snap, not horrific, just part of the entire picture that the character left in my mind. 

He is the most popular in the cast so I clearly did not get what this show was aiming to portray.  

[Tiger]

2 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

Remind me what this was?  Not doubting you, I just don't remember him being nasty to them.  Was it about the chess tourney?  Oh, I thought he was a bit nasty to Beth in the drug store over her prescriptions/bc issue, and having a secret retirement plan  

That was Randall being "nasty to Beth"?!?  

[Katy M]

5 minutes ago, Tiger said:

2 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

Remind me what this was?  Not doubting you, I just don't remember him being nasty to them.  Was it about the chess tourney?  Oh, I thought he was a bit nasty to Beth in the drug store over her prescriptions/bc issue, and having a secret retirement plan  

That was Randall being "nasty to Beth"?!?  

It was kind of jerky.  You can never put full blame on b/c failures on your partner, unless they did it on purpose, which was clearly not the case.  Stuff happens.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Tiger said:

That was Randall being "nasty to Beth"?!?  

He was scolding her, in public, like she should've warned him in advance of a mistake she only discovered later.  "Hey, Randall, I'm taking antibiotics which might make my bc pills ineffective and I might accidentally conceive."  It didn't even make sense.  While in the next breath, he informs her of his plans for them both to retire early to Charleston.  Doesn't that seem like a double standard?  

[ClareWalks]

My UO is that I do not care when Jack died. I think it is so obvious he died when these kids are 15 (which is also an UO, apparently!), but I almost could not care *less* when Jack died. Maybe how, if it was Significant (note the capital S), which apparently the writers want me to think it is Significant with a capital S because they are sure dragging out this death reveal until I am long past giving a crap about it.

[Empress1]

9 hours ago, Katy M said:

I agree with everything you said.  Just wanted to say, sometimes packing the kids lunch is more about wanting to manage the food inventory than because kid can't do it.  Also, I do have to say, I don't know anyone in college who couldn't/didn't do their own laundry once there.

I did. I had to teach a friend to do laundry freshman year. He was the only child of a stay-at-home Italian mom - her entire life revolved around taking care of her husband and son, so he didn't know how to do laundry or cook anything (which was less of an issue in the freshman dorms since we didn't have kitchens). He stood there blinking at the machines, then asked me if the fabric softener went into the washer after the cycle was over. I learned how to do laundry when I was ten and have been doing it ever since, so I had no idea people like him existed. When I see teens on TV that don't have chores, I'm baffled. I was pretty self-sufficient by the time I was 15. Worked, could get where I needed to go on public transportation, could feed myself and my younger brother (was sometimes required to do so, since my parents worked - sometimes my parents ate my leftovers for dinner), and cared for my own clothes.

30 minutes ago, ClareWalks said:

My UO is that I do not care when Jack died. I think it is so obvious he died when these kids are 15 (which is also an UO, apparently!), but I almost could not care *less* when Jack died. Maybe how, if it was Significant (note the capital S), which apparently the writers want me to think it is Significant with a capital S because they are sure dragging out this death reveal until I am long past giving a crap about it.

I don't think it's obvious that he died when they were 15, but I don't care about that either. I wonder how he died and how much time elapsed between his death and Rebecca marrying Miguel, but the timing of his death doesn't interest me at all.

[MsJamieDornan]

Unpopular opinion.   I'm tired of them dragging out how and when Jack died. Soon, I wont care.

I'm tired of not knowing if Kate and Toby have jobs or where they are staying.

I'm tired of not being sure where any of them live. Pittsburgh, New Jersey, NYC ?

I'm tired of them pretending Kate is a typical female, she's not. She's huge. From the first episode when she tries to weigh herself, FYI, there is no home scale that goes up to her weight.      She also  wouldn't fit in an airline seat or chairs she and her brothers were sitting in at the hospital waiting for Toby. NO WAY would she fit in the theater seats. She's lucky she can even walk more that a few feet without resting.  etc...

And, I don't like Miguel. Where I grew up, you don't marry your best friends wife or go out with their ex girlfriend. He's should have stayed away. He also shouldn't be whining about family traditions and needing to wear the hat either. Go make your own traditions.

The aging make up they put on Rebecca and Miguel is ridiculous. They are in their 60's not their 80's. I focused on Miguel during his speech to Kevin and thought " wow. how arrogant" and then it hit me, it was just his frozen- like facial features and bad elderly acting.

Whew, thank you for letting me vent.  I'm sure I will have more.

[Judois]

I gave up on this show about two episodes ago. I'm sick of how any storyline Kate has is about her weight or Toby,whom I can't stand,or both. She had one episode where she was working and that was a while back. As one who is obese I can tell you I have other things in my life going on. I'm also not just a cheerleader for my siblings. 

[JudyObscure]

Re: Jack's jealousy over Ben.  I think he had a right to it. "Bring it on Home,"  is "our," song ( Mr. Obscure is military, often gone) so we've requested it from dozens of bands and none of the singers ever felt the need to direct it to a fellow band member.  It's a song of sexual yearning and Rebecca ruined it by smiling that big lantern jawed grin through the whole thing, and then by needlessly looking at Ben while singing it.  I thought I heard Sam Cook turning over in his grave.

[Tiger]

11 hours ago, chocolatine said:

Some companies have sneaky ways of retaliating against employees who take FMLA. When those employees return to work, they get the least desirable projects. If they complain and/or make the tiniest mistake, they get negative performance reviews. Negative performance review = no raise, bonus, or promotion, and in the worst case scenario, "performance improvement plan" and eventual firing. I wouldn't be surprised if Randall's company is like that, too.

 

6 hours ago, Crs97 said:

Hubby took FMLA when our oldest was born prematurely and finally got to come home from the NICU.  New co-worker who wanted his job used the time to trash him, screw things up, and then blame him for "abandoning them with a mess."  Hubby ended up having to go back a month early to clean things up and protect his clients from being collateral damage.  I am still bitter about that co-worker.

The thing is, business can't stop or even slow when someone in the office takes fmla or maternity or paternity or even a lenghty vacation.  And when person A is out, it creates more work persons B thru Z.   I'm not saying some of these leaves arent legitimate, but this idea that somebody should he able to take leave and then come back as if nothing has changed is ridiculous.

Ive worked for two international accounting firms and in about 10 years in the workforce between those two, every single person I've seen take any absence longer than a day or two has been quickly shunted aside upon their return, and frankly with good reason.   Twice in the 8 or so years I was with my first/previous employer, guys in my group took a few weeks paternity and both times me and another colleague had to then take the absent party's 60 hrs of work per week upon ourselves, meaning we both had to 90 hrs a week.  

Several yeara ago, I had a parent died at the end of a protracted illness, and the entire time I only missed one day of work.   And if I had taken extended time off I wouldnt have expected to walk back in like nothing had happened while I was out.

[chocolatine]

24 minutes ago, Tiger said:

Twice in the 8 or so years I was with my first/previous employer, guys in my group took a few weeks paternity and both times me and another colleague had to then take the absent party's 60 hrs of work per week upon ourselves, meaning we both had to 90 hrs a week. 

That's just bad management. FMLA applies to companies of 50 or more people, precisely so that kind of thing doesn't happen. It does require some planning ahead and reshuffling of projects/responsibilities, but it can be done without increasing everyone's workload by 50%. I've been on a team where a few people - including the boss - took maternity leave, and we made it work. If Mark Zuckerberg was able to take four weeks paternity leave without Facebook being thrown into disarray, so should everyone else who works for a company with 50 or more employees.

[mansonlamps]

20 hours ago, PRgal said:

Some parents just don't believe it's "appropriate" for kids to do anything other than minimal chores and study.  My grandmother even told me it was "inappropriate" for a lady to be in the kitchen, thus, I never learned how to properly cook.  And unlike other kids of immigrant parents/grandparents, I have no true cultural recipes to carry on with me.  My grandmother was like that with my mom, too.  When my mom first got to Canada, she didn't even know how to boil an egg.  And yes, my grandmother practically freaked out when my mom tried to make me do laundry.  I mean, I had to learn before moving to campus, right? 

Note:  I'm around the same age as the Big Three (a year older, in fact - almost to the day). 

Not being rude, just curious.  If you are not supposed to be in the kitchen or learn to do laundry, who is supposed to do these things in your grandmother's opinion?

[izabella]

7 minutes ago, chocolatine said:

That's just bad management. FMLA applies to companies of 50 or more people, precisely so that kind of thing doesn't happen. It does require some planning ahead and reshuffling of projects/responsibilities, but it can be done without increasing everyone's workload by 50%. I've been on a team where a few people - including the boss - took maternity leave, and we made it work. If Mark Zuckerberg was able to take four weeks paternity leave without Facebook being thrown into disarray, so should everyone else who works for a company with 50 or more employees.

When I read that a company expects people to work 60 hours a week, that tells me the company is using them to squeeze out every last drop of profit rather than giving a shit about their employees.  They could hire another person, and then all three could work 40 hour weeks rather than squeezing every last drop of life out of the people they employ.  That's not sustainable - people burn out and make mistakes.

[Tiger]

5 hours ago, izabella said:

When I read that a company expects people to work 60 hours a week, that tells me the company is using them to squeeze out every last drop of profit rather than giving a shit about their employees.  They could hire another person, and then all three could work 40 hour weeks rather than squeezing every last drop of life out of the people they employ.  That's not sustainable - people burn out and make mistakes.

Lawyers, doctors, accountants, c-suite execs, and other white collar jobs require at least 60 hrs per week.  

5 hours ago, chocolatine said:

That's just bad management. FMLA applies to companies of 50 or more people, precisely so that kind of thing doesn't happen. It does require some planning ahead and reshuffling of projects/responsibilities, but it can be done without increasing everyone's workload by 50%. I've been on a team where a few people - including the boss - took maternity leave, and we made it work. If Mark Zuckerberg was able to take four weeks paternity leave without Facebook being thrown into disarray, so should everyone else who works for a company with 50 or more employees.

Sure it's easy to replace someone such as a cashier at a retail store or one exec among a team that just oversees, but when accountants like me or lawyers as another example take time off, those people can't just be temporarily replaced, especially if that person is specialist.   The credentials and client issues alone make it impossible.

[izabella]

12 minutes ago, Tiger said:

Lawyers, doctors, accountants, c-suite execs, and other white collar jobs require at least 60 hrs per week.  

I know.  I have one of them.  It sucks.  And I hate that my employer gets away with it.

[chocolatine]

4 minutes ago, Tiger said:

Sure it's easy to replace someone such as a cashier at a retail store or one exec among a team that just oversees, but when accountants like me or lawyers as another example take time off, those people can't just be temporarily replaced, especially if that person is specialist.   The credentials and client issues alone make it impossible.

In my case we were a team of eight information architects/software developers at a large company with many projects on our plate, ie. we were also highly specialized and hands-on. There are always some projects that are less time-sensitive and more "background" than others, so those can be put on the back burner for a few weeks if someone's out; it's just a matter of organization.

It was a job that required 60 hours a week, but nobody was required to work more than that when another team member took time off.

[PRgal]

48 minutes ago, mansonlamps said:

Not being rude, just curious.  If you are not supposed to be in the kitchen or learn to do laundry, who is supposed to do these things in your grandmother's opinion?

No clue.  I suppose she believed I would eventually hire help - even though we didn't have help to do that (cleaning person came once a week, but she didn't cook/do laundry).  Or maybe I was supposed to figure it out on my own and NOT be a lady?  Strange, because my grandmother did all that while my mom was growing up AND while I was small.

[AuntiePam]

8 hours ago, Judois said:

I gave up on this show about two episodes ago. I'm sick of how any storyline Kate has is about her weight or Toby,whom I can't stand,or both. She had one episode where she was working and that was a while back. As one who is obese I can tell you I have other things in my life going on. I'm also not just a cheerleader for my siblings. 

I'm okay with the weight story line.  I can sorta relate -- when I was pregnant, it was always at the front of my mind -- I'm pregnant.  When I had a cancer scare, same thing.  I think that anything that relates to our bodies -- and our self-image, our appearance, our health -- that's what we'll be thinking about.  I've known women who obsessed over bad hair days, or an acne breakout, and men who freaked out over hair loss.  And for someone as overweight as Kate -- it's probably a focus from everyone she encounters, at least momentarily.  We're going to wonder how she feels, is she going to be able to handle getting in and out of a car, walking through a mall, fitting into a seat, is her blood pressure okay, etc.  We're that kind of society -- snap judgments based on physical appearance. 

Kate, and Crissy Metz, have to be wondering if that excess weight will shorten their lives.  It will affect everything they do, and especially their relationships.  It can't be ignored.  Can it? 

[SlackerInc]

A heart is not enough for what Winston, chocolatine, and izabella said!

11 hours ago, Tiger said:

Ive worked for two international accounting firms and in about 10 years in the workforce between those two, every single person I've seen take any absence longer than a day or two has been quickly shunted aside upon their return, and frankly with good reason.

It's one thing to advocate the repeal of FMLA (even though it is extremely weak tea by international standards).  I would fight to prevent that repeal, but I would never say you didn't have the right to lobby for it to happen.  But you seem to be going further and saying businesses should just blatantly flout the law.  Do you not believe in the rule of law?  Wow.

 

10 hours ago, Tiger said:

Lawyers, doctors, accountants, c-suite execs, and other white collar jobs require at least 60 hrs per week.  

That they typically work that many hours does not mean the job category inherently requires it.  Does a French lawyer work that many hours?  I think this reflects a traditionally workaholic tendency of American society, which millennials are beginning to change, seeking greater work-life balance.

And are you going to tell me doctors couldn't work fewer hours by seeing fewer patients?  I don't buy it. 

[DearEvette]

On 2/16/2017 at 11:26 AM, Katy M said:

Add to that he's sick and actually an invited guest, yes, he deserved way more courtesy.

IIRC, At the time, she (and I think quite a few of us on this board) thought he was just a con man.  I am not gonna lie, if I thought a con man was planting his flag in my house I too would have asked him, quite bluntly how long he was planning to stay.

[topanga]

I'm jumping into the discussion to defend season-long network dramas. When you're a cable show or even a network show that's anywhere from 10-13 episodes long, each episode can be full of dramatic plot reveals--in fact,  since you only have that many weeks to do all of your plot development and to complete character arcs, every episode has to be either fast-paced or revealing in some way.

vs. a 22-24 episode season, where you have to stretch out a story over several months. I'm not making excuses for bad episodes, but I wish people would allow episodes that are more slice-of-life and might not have earth-shattering plot or character reveals, especially specially in the middle of the season. Yeah, you can call these filler episodes. But if they give me information about the characters or the stories I care about, I'm on board.*

*That being said, I wasn't a fan of the all-flashback episode. But that's because I enjoy the present story and the adult Big 3 more than I do Jack and Rebecca. The younger Big 3 actors are amazing, and I do enjoy learning about their childhoods. But I prefer the characters as adults.  

Bigger question: should networks still develop 22-24 episode seasons, or is this becoming a dated formula?

[ClareWalks]

17 minutes ago, topanga said:

I wish people would allow episodes that are more slice-of-life and might not have earth-shattering plot or character reveals, especially specially in the middle of the season.

I agree. It's nice to have some room to breathe, particularly with a show that just loves twists and shit ;) As for whether long seasons should still be a thing, I think so. It depends on the show. A nice tight ten-episode season works better with some shows (like American Horror Story), while a longer, more meandering season works better for other things with bigger stories to tell. I wish people would give this show a chance to reveal things instead of just being mad that stuff hasn't happened fast enough. 

That being said, I know I complained that I don't care how Jack died because they dragged it out so much. That's just because they constantly bring it up and then say "....but I don't want to talk about it." It's like that dramatic friend we all have on Facebook who writes something vague and then if you ask they say "I don't want to talk." Then don't post it, bitch! Jack's death has become the Vague Dramatic FB Post of this show.

[ShadowFacts]

1 hour ago, topanga said:

Bigger question: should networks still develop 22-24 episode seasons, or is this becoming a dated formula?

It might be dated, but I like the long season because the few shows I watch, I mostly watch in real time.  If I like it, I like having it to look forward to every week.  There are a couple shows of the 10 or so episode format that I like, but I do not care to have to wait another year for a new season.  I lose interest, forget what happened last, etc.  However, This Is Us might actually be suited to shorter seasons, or only a few longer ones.  I don't know how long interest will be sustainable for me within the flashback structure, once the suspense of Jack's death is gone.  I'm not invested enough in teen Big Three or especially Rebecca.  I do like present day and if they can develop that well, a long season is okay with me.

[ItCouldBeWorse]

10 hours ago, SlackerInc said:

And are you going to tell me doctors couldn't work fewer hours by seeing fewer patients?  I don't buy it. 

Might be hard to cover their overhead (i.e. insurance premiums, office staff, rent, billing service, answering service) and still make a reasonable profit.  Especially doctors in the primary fields, who tend to be self-employed and have the lowest profit margins.

[AmandaPanda]

Discussion of FMLA needs to be moved to the Social Issues thread.

[CleoCaesar]

3 hours ago, topanga said:

 I wish people would allow episodes that are more slice-of-life and might not have earth-shattering plot or character reveals, especially specially in the middle of the season. Yeah, you can call these filler episodes.

But we're in mid-February. That's smack dab in the middle of sweeps. There should be no filler episodes at this particular point in the season according to the traditional 22-episodes-per-season structure.

[HeyThere83]

See, I was thinking the show speeds through things incredibly fast, and leaves the bulk or meat of a story completely out. And then they seem to spend time on other things like the Dr.'s story when the series is brand spankin new. Or....they introduce new characters like Olivia who seemed completely and utterly pointless. And if Fogelman claims she was necessary to Kevin realizing he was still in love with his ex-wife, well then that was told very sloppily. It makes it seem like they just decided it mid-way through the story. In general, I think they need to really work on the pacing and consider the overall structure of the show because I see how it become detrimental.