Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Stereotyped “Welfare Queen” doesn’t exist anymore

Posted by on May. 5, 2012 at 12:09 PM
  • 87 Replies

 

Poll

Question: Do Welfare Queens still exist?

Options:

Yes

No

Unsure


Only group members can vote in this poll.

Total Votes: 100

View Results

“Welfare Queen” is a term used to describe a woman, regardless of race, that has children just for the benefit of welfare and free housing.

In western culture this woman is the lowest of low. She is scum.

All women that are single mothers and are on any governmental assistance, or use any other form of it, are depicted as welfare queens.

The “welfare queen” is a woman who is fraudulent, a woman who has no place in life, who does not work hard, and is not trying to make anything of herself.

These women are the scapegoats in a society that has to find someone to blame for the mistakes of others.

They are the reluctant victims, the ones who unintentionally received this attention.

So basically, these women are victims because they are not married and they have no real stable income, so their only option to have some stability is through governmental assistance.

As long as our society is looking for someone to blame, these women will continue to be the scapegoats.

They will continue to have a name of ‘gold digger,’ whore, or what have you.


continued ....http://www.theonlinerocket.com/opinion/stereotyped-welfare-queen-doesn-t-exist-anymore-1.2862029#.T6VPDLNYs84


Do you think there are still Welfare Queens?




Fear of serious injury alone cannot justify oppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears.
Louis D. Brandeis
by on May. 5, 2012 at 12:09 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
Naturewoman4
by Platinum Member on May. 5, 2012 at 11:35 PM
2 moms liked this

I do believe there are alot of them, sadly.  My niece is one of them.  She has 6 kids, & has never worked.  When, her youngest turned 6, she decided she wanted another.  So, I believe it is for the money.  Her husband, is the father of her last one.  He doesn't work either.  Why ANYONE would have another child, with NO jobs, I will NEVER understand.  I don't understand how anyone can be on PA for so long.  She's around 39.  Her husband is around 28, & I will NEVER understand why our Gov. or State keeps allowing ppl to do this.  It's sad to me that we have ppl like this in our Country & they get away with it by OUR Gov.

stormcris
by Christy on May. 5, 2012 at 11:56 PM
1 mom liked this

I likewise know a few people who do this. I also know people who keep having children due to the tax break and refund. The latter I find more often. I think wherever there is a way people will find a reason to use a system that provides for them. I find it funny but there are Corporate Welfare Queens (or Kings if you so chose) that do the same thing with Walmart being a prime example. I don't think the idea of free money/property, as long as it exist, will ever not be abused in some form or fashion. 

Quoting Naturewoman4:

I do believe there are alot of them, sadly.  My niece is one of them.  She has 6 kids, & has never worked.  When, her youngest turned 6, she decided she wanted another.  So, I believe it is for the money.  Her husband, is the father of her last one.  He doesn't work either.  Why ANYONE would have another child, with NO jobs, I will NEVER understand.  I don't understand how anyone can be on PA for so long.  She's around 39.  Her husband is around 28, & I will NEVER understand why our Gov. or State keeps allowing ppl to do this.  It's sad to me that we have ppl like this in our Country & they get away with it by OUR Gov.


Fear of serious injury alone cannot justify oppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears.
Louis D. Brandeis
Veni.Vidi.Vici.
by on May. 5, 2012 at 11:58 PM
13 moms liked this

I voted no.

I should also mention that I have been drinking while on pain meds.

ha = )

Sisteract
by Whoopie on May. 5, 2012 at 11:59 PM
8 moms liked this

Probably not, it's hard to fit the 12 car/booster seats in a new Gold Cadillac.

Wasn't Reagan's WQ found to be a myth? Such an actor.

PortiaRose
by on May. 6, 2012 at 12:01 AM
4 moms liked this
Wow. You can't have children for more benefits, anymore. At least not in CA... but I think that person exists. I think people live off of disability more than anything else nowadays.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
_Kissy_
by on May. 6, 2012 at 12:02 AM
3 moms liked this

I have never encountered anyone like this other than the stereotypes that are portrayed on television. There's only one person that has been on assistance in my family and that's because of losing her job, damn at will jobs She was on FS for 6 mos before finding another job. 

The job field I'm in does show me a lot of the harsh realities of life, but I would never label one as such.

stormcris
by Christy on May. 6, 2012 at 12:04 AM

In GA the more children you have the more you get. The more children you have the more money you can make as well and qualify but that is sort of outside the topic. However, if the child hits the age of 6, without having a dependant disability, someone must be working or they have to have another child to continue on PA without working. Some people do continue to have children but overall I think they are a very small percentage of PA. 

Quoting PortiaRose:

Wow. You can't have children for more benefits, anymore. At least not in CA... but I think that person exists. I think people live off of disability more than anything else nowadays.


Fear of serious injury alone cannot justify oppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears.
Louis D. Brandeis
stacymomof2
by Ruby Member on May. 6, 2012 at 12:12 AM
5 moms liked this

They never existed in the first place.

charleyd68
by Platinum Member on May. 6, 2012 at 12:23 AM
1 mom liked this

I never believed it existed in the first place. Like all things and People, there are some who take advantage of the system, morals and People. And they give others bad names. We are Mothers, we know what child birth IS,so to believe that any woman would go through that for an extra 40-50$ a month or bi-monthly is Ludicrous. If a woman thinks her pregnancy would be easier because welfare, a Public Assistance service is in place, well that's a different thing altogether. There are those who believe welfare will take care of them, and aren't obligated to better their Lots , However their still not the proverbial "welfare queen"

stormcris
by Christy on May. 6, 2012 at 12:24 AM
3 moms liked this

I think the finding about the Reagan era charges was that people who were unemployed would continue to have children regardless. Many will. But, I think that finding was also challenged when they showed the generational welfare family that was proud to have been on welfare for a lifetime and through two generations. The reasoning now is that because of the changes to welfare Clinton put in this is no longer true.  This is only speaking on the monetary welfare though and those numbers have not really budged much since the AFDC was change to TANF. However, just on the medical, food and shelter programs there is still a tremendous case load and honestly I can see why. You have a choice if you are on these systems. You can go to work and try and find a job that allows you to still be on those programs meaning you work for very little; yet, a person has to be careful not to stay within limits. or you can go to work and get a job that is over the current poverty rates and lose these programs which means you are now working for a negative result because of the high cost of insurance and food, or you can continue not to work and insure that your child has food and medical and do some illegal crap for money. If you crunch the numbers it is not hard to see why people who can't get average yearly income would chose to try and stay on the programs.

Quoting Sisteract:

Probably not, it's hard to fit the 12 car/booster seats in a new Gold Cadillac.

Wasn't Reagan's WQ found to be a myth? Such an actor.


Fear of serious injury alone cannot justify oppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears.
Louis D. Brandeis
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)



Featured