Category Archives: Childfree

If you, for whatever reason, find yourself searching breed me or breeding kink on Twitter one day, expect to find a flood of posts celebrating sweaty bodies and close-up shots of dicks. Cum lots of it is almost always present, along with captions like wish someone would fill me up like this! or I need to swallow loads upon loads of your cum!

You might expect this to be pure heterosexual fantasy, but a lot of the posts are super gay. Dont get me wrong, there are plenty of photos of people Kegel-squeezing ejaculate out of their vaginas, but there are also gay orgies celebrating the joy of cum dumping. People of all genders, it seems, can have a breeding kink.

The increasingly popular fetish refers to arousal at the thought of being impregnated or impregnating someone, or if you want to get specific about it ejaculating in them. There are overtones of domination and objectification; you are a hole, a cum bucket, or, in the parlance of the kink, a breeding bitch.

According to Google Trends, searches for breeding kink started to pick up in 2020, peaking late last year amid a flurry of jokey TikToks about taking the breeding kink too far, followed by a pan downwards to a positive pregnancy test or protruding belly.

Getting turned on by somebody coming inside you is nothing new after all, the sex toy industry has an entire subsection of ejaculating dildos. Think of it as a sliding scale: There are those who love cream pies at one end and people who really get off on impregnation at the other. Then theres forced breeding, where the kink combines with consensual non-consent (CNC) or rape play, in which willing victims ask breeders to force your seed into my little fertile pussy! as one Reddit user puts it.

Valentina Bellucci, a porn creator and studio head of StepHouseXXX, has noticed the fetish picking up steam online, particularly in amateur style porn. In fact, shes already been asked to do a few breeding kink scenes herself. Bellucci thinks its directly related to the growing popularity of hotwife women in relationships who have sex with other people, especially men, often with their partners consent and encouragement and swinger content.

The term breeding was being used in the swingers community for years, she explains. You could find a lot of posts on the swinger groups where a guy would look for a bull who will breed his wife. Now I see a lot of content like this.

But whats the appeal of all this farmyard language like bull, seed, even breeding sow? I think it has to do with dominance, and taking ownership of another man's wife, she says. Based on my experience, there are swingers who are more into this aggressive approach and those who are more interested in creating some type of relationship or friendship with another couple. Usually, people who use animalistic language are all about sex. In this type of scenario, it feels like the bull is just a tool. He has to show up, fuck and leave.

Anonymous Twitter account @eyes4pies exclusively tweets breeding fetish content to hundreds of followers. His bio describes him as a 33-year-old breeding obsessive who spends all day imagining fallin in luv [sic] and filling every pussy on earth!.

I prefer it more than any other way [of sex] and do it as much as I can with consent of course, he tells me over DMs. But I dont have sex with women not on birth control, so maybe the breeding aspect isnt the focus in real life. But I think about it while having sex, nearly every time.

He identifies as a switch, and enjoys the possessive aspect of internal ejaculation. Of course you dont own them, but you are driving in and planting your seed and leaving yourself inside of them. Thats crazy hot to me.

Baby Bunny, a 25-year-old sub, tweets from @BunnieHumper96 and describes herself as an aspiring housewife with a breeding kink. For me, breeding is almost primal, she says. Its a man choosing me to carry his children.

Is it fantasy play or does she really does want loads of kids?Id classify myself as a monogamous breeding submissive, Bunny replies. I'm not going to just let any Dom I have impregnate me and then find out in a year we dont work out. But Id like to have as many babies as we can afford when we do get to that point of no longer pretending, but living, our kinks.

In the most literal possible interpretation of the kink, OnlyFans star and self-described good little church girl gone wild Daisy Mae caters directly to her followers fetish for breeding and pregnant bodies.

I didnt feel sexy during my first pregnancy, so when I found out I was pregnant just after I started OnlyFans, I was like, There goes my chance of having a job through this pandemic, she tells me over FaceTime. Little did I know, so many gentlemen love, love, love hearing about the body changes that you're having.

I have men from all walks of life [on OnlyFans] tell me it's the most beautiful form a woman can be in, because it's embracing her true genuine femininity, she adds. I'm able to get men to come just by talking about how my boobs are fuller, and my skin is stretched really tight.

So does this mean shes permanently pregnant? I cant get pregnant too soon [after a previous pregnancy] as its just so hard on my body. But I can recycle content. With my last pregnancy I took 45 videos and 2,000 photos.

Like @eyes4pies, though, many people who engage in a breeding fetish dont actually want pregnancy to result from sex, in the same way that consensually engaging in rape play doesnt mean you actually want to sexually assault someone, or be assaulted yourself.

The r/childfree subreddit, a popular forum for people who dont want kids, has several posts from people weighing up their fetish against a fear of pregnancy. Do any of my childfree friends here have a breeding kink but are REPULSED by the idea of actually getting pregnant/having children? one user, Mother_Of_Draigainzz, writes. It's a dangerous kink to have.

Porn legend Bree Mills, who heads up Adult Time, a porn streaming platform, emphasises that breeding porn is not reserved for straight couples, either. You definitely see a lot of breeding scenarios within gay male content, she explains. In fact, I recently wrapped a production for my studio, Disruptive Films, all about a dystopian future breeding farm for men!

Her sentiments are echoed by Joao Florencio, a senior art history lecturer at the University of Exeter, and the author of Bareback Porn, Porous Masculinities, Queer Futures: The Ethics of Becoming-Pig. He suggests the fetishisation of breeding may even have originated in gay male sex scenes in the aftermath of the AIDS crisis.

In that context, breeding appears first among the barebacking subcultures of gay men who eroticised HIV transmission at a time when we didnt yet have PrEP to prevent HIV transmission, he says. Those men understood sex without condoms and potential HIV infection as something akin to heterosexual reproduction and its associated blood kinship, whereby they felt connected by blood to one another through HIV, just like a biological family.

It might be tempting to conclude that the desire to be bred is reflective of a wider generational fear of parenthood in a world that has priced millennials out of having children and is heating up at a terrifying rate, what feels more forbidden than using sex to procreate?

But at its core, the breeding fetish seems to be a celebration of something more animalistic; a simple game of domination and risk, with a little dash of taboo misogyny thrown in. After all, if you believe that you can be a complex, smart and interesting person beyond your reproductive organs, what could be naughtier than pretending youre not?

@iamhelenthomas

More:

What Is a Breeding Kink? How Unprotected Sex Became a Turn-On - VICE UK

Many people are considering investing in stocks during the bear market. Whether you didnt have the funds previously or you simply cant resist the relatively low prices right now, investing in stocks can be a good hedge against inflation.

See Our List: 100 Most Influential Money ExpertsCompare: 4 Unusual Places To Invest Money During a Bear Market

The definition of a bear market is when a market experiences prolonged price declines, typically falling 20% below their recent highs, John L. Savarino, an investment advisor representative at Rooted Wealth Advisors, explained. This makes for a good time to begin investing because you can look at it from a perspective that securities are at a discounted price. The market is cyclical, so if you begin investing when the market is setting record highs, the chances of the market declining eventually are very high.

If you can manage the stress of watching your balances fall on paper until the market turns around, bear market investing can ultimately pay off when the market turns bullish again. And that will happen. Patience, consistency, and discipline are necessary when it comes to investing, Savarino said.

What else should beginning investors know before buying stocks for the first time?

Investing does not need to be complicated, but you do need to take the time to learn, said Jay Zigmont, Ph.D, CHP and the founder of Childfree Wealth. He recommended reading as much as you can on the topic, including classics like The Little Common Sense Book on Investing, The Simple Path to Wealth and A Random Walk Down Wall Street.

Zigmont also echoed the advice of Warren Buffett to never invest in a business you cannot understand. He said, Follow the general rule of only investing in things you understand. Understanding an investment includes knowing what you are investing in, how it impacts your financial plan and where to hold it.

Dont be afraid to ask for help navigating the investment landscape, experts agree. Zigmont suggested looking for an advice-only, fee-only fiduciary certified financial planner.

Catherine Valega, CFP, CAIA and wealth consultant at Green Bee Advisory, said, The fee you pay for an advisor to help with your overall plan is more than recouped based on how we can help you invest for growth, protect your assets and reduce taxes.

When youre choosing a financial advisor, look for one thats willing to help you grow your wealth in the long term, no matter how little youre starting out with, advised Andrew Gold, a financial advisor and investment strategist at Prestige Wealth Management. If they wont work with you now, you probably dont want to work with them later when you have the extra money, he said.

Before you put a dime into the stock market, youll want to understand your own risk tolerance.

Heather Winston, CFP and director of financial planning and advice at Principal Financial, explained, Risk tolerance is the amount of risk one is willing to take, and it will remain reasonably static throughout your lifetime. That said, risk tolerance is only one component of investing its also important to apply that tolerance to your timeline to meet your goals. Generally, the more time you have, the more risk you can assume because time can help smooth out the markets gyrations. Conversely, if your time horizon is short, reducing risk can enable you to preserve what you have amassed.

She noted that its normal to feel the pain of losses more significantly than the joy of gains. This can cloud our decision making, she said. One of the most efficient risk-management strategies is simply sticking to your plan. Youre giving yourself time to ride out and recover from periods of volatility and bear market cycles.

In a bear market, it might be tempting to try to find the bottom of your favorite stocks and buy at that low point. But you never know a stocks low point until it begins to climb again. Instead, experts suggest using dollar cost averaging to reduce the risks of short-term volatility.

Gold recommended getting started with exchange-traded funds (ETFs), which are collections of similar stocks to be able to trickle into the market in a broad basket of companies without committing to the success of one company alone.

Savarino echoed Golds sentiments about beginning with broad exposure to the market. Index funds that track the total stock market are a really good place to start, he said. They are usually very low cost and simply track the performance of the stock market instead of taking on the risk of one single company at a time.

As your portfolio expands, you may feel comfortable investing in larger companies that you like. But low cost index funds are the best place to start, in my opinion, Savarino said.

Its important to remember that the stock market is a long game. A beginner investor should be buying stock for long-term growth and accumulation, Savarino said. That means before you begin investing, youll want to make sure you have adequate emergency savings in an easy-to-access account.

Experts traditionally recommended having at least six months salary set aside, but Valega said she recently upped that recommendation to 12 to 24 months of expenses saved, based on the possibility of a weak job market in the near future.

The cash you invest, Winston said, should be money that you have left over after you have established an emergency fund for unforeseen expenses, and after you have reduced or eliminated unmanageable debt obligations.

When youre ready to get started, youll need to choose a platform. Savarino pointed out that most platforms today have no fees to open an account, buy, sell or trade assets. I think the biggest thing a first-time investor needs to be aware of is what resources the platform offers, preferably at no cost, he said.

He noted that larger platforms like TD Ameritrade provide a wealth of training resources, material, and personalized, one-on-one help. Smaller platforms may not offer that, he said.

Some first-time investors lean toward Robinhood because of the ability to buy fractionals, or a small percentage of an expensive stock. However, Gold warned, I would steer clear of Robinhood because of the lack of transparency. Also, during times of volatility, they sometimes shut down, which isnt good, he added.

Gold said that a bear market represents a good time to start investing since most stocks are 20% to 30% off their highs. But first, you need to get into the habit of setting that money aside for investments.

Focusing on the behaviors rather than the results will more often lead to success, he said. Both saving and investing are important when it comes to getting a head start on your financial future.

Whether youre starting to build out your portfolio or just aiming to save for a rainy day, make it automatic, Gold recommended. Everyone has a transaction size that takes it from a no-brainer swipe of your card to something youll want to consider more carefully. That number could be $50, $100 or even $500. Decide what that number is and set up your bank account to have one-quarter of that come out each week when you get paid, he said.

Cash App Users: Use Cash Card Round Ups To Invest Spare Change in Stocks and BitcoinLearn: Podcaster Andrew Sather Shares His 3 Foundations of a Prudent Investing Strategy

If you get paid bi-weekly, youll want to pull half the amount with each paycheck. Dont go into stressing about that money being pulled out of your account. If you can conquer the first couple of months of saving, you will have an easy time transitioning to be a savvy saver and investor in the future, Gold said.

More From GOBankingRates

Dawn Allcot is a full-time freelance writer and content marketing specialist who geeks out about finance, e-commerce, technology, and real estate. Her lengthy list of publishing credits include Bankrate, Lending Tree, and Chase Bank. She is the founder and owner of GeekTravelGuide.net, a travel, technology, and entertainment website. She lives on Long Island, New York, with a veritable menagerie that includes 2 cats, a rambunctious kitten, and three lizards of varying sizes and personalities plus her two kids and husband. Find her on Twitter, @DawnAllcot.

View original post here:

Expert Investing Tips: Where To Start When Buying Stocks for the First Time - GOBankingRates

The fall of Roe v. Wade stands to dramatically shake up contraception trends. In the days following the U.S. Supreme Courts Dobbs ruling, clinics began to report a surge in people requesting tubal ligationsmore commonly known as getting ones tubes tied. This is a procedure in which the fallopian tubes are surgically blocked or sealed to prevent future pregnancies, one that is very difficult to reverse.

But those requesting the procedure often encounter a big barrier: doctors. Despite the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) advising that respect for an individual womans reproductive autonomy should be the primary concern guiding sterilization provision, people who can get pregnant are often refused the procedure. By and large, the decision still lies very much in the hands of the physician.

A doctor will typically refuse to perform a sterilization procedure on the grounds that the person is too young, that they dont have enough children, or that they might come to regret the decisionor a combination of these factors. Without a partner or any children, a persons chances of obtaining the procedure drop even lower. (There is no existing ethical guidance from the male counterpart to ACOGthe American Urological Associationon the provision of vasectomy services.)

The attitudes of todays doctors are grounded in a history of pronatalism thats existed for decades in the United States. In the 1970s the criteria for allowing sterilization were even stricter: A woman would be denied access to the procedure unless their age multiplied by the number of children they had equaled 120 or greaterif you were 40 years old with three children, you would be approved for the procedure, for example. In essence, a womans reproductive autonomy was decided on the basis of a mathematical calculation. Even today, doctors often require the sign-off of the patients partner.

Story continues

Lisa Harris, an ob-gyn and professor at the University of Michigan, has seen an influx of young women requesting tubal ligations at her institution since the fall of Roe. Many of the patients have come to her after having been refused by other doctors. Its a different manifestation of society not trusting women to know what they need, Harris says, and probably related to the same distrust that leads to things like abortion bans.

For Kayla, who lives in Chicago, a traumatic experience when she gave birth prematurely to her daughter last year meant she is sure she never wants to have another child. I cant see myself going through that again, she told her doctor. When her physician suggested birth control, Kayla pleaded for something more permanent. And she told me, No, Im too youngMaybe my daughter will want siblings. Since then, Kayla has visited at least three doctors requesting a tubal ligation, and all have refused, for similar reasons.

The concept of the risk of regret is a significant barrier to access and is based on the subjective opinion that people who can become pregnant will always want to bear children. In reality, this isnt true. The largest study to look at rates of reported regret in sterilized womenthe Collaborative Review of Sterilizationfollowed 11,000 sterilized women for 14 years after having the procedure. It found that child-free women who had been sterilized reported the lowest rates of regret among all groups of patients. And yet this myth that women, especially women without children, will come to regret their decision to be sterilized persists, says Elizabeth Hintz, an assistant professor of health communication at the University of Connecticut.

All of these reasons for denying sterilization are in direct contradiction of ACOGs ethical guidance. Yet doctors face no repercussions for refusing to perform procedures; the U.S. does not track data on how many sterilization requests are denied. So theres no accountabilitytheres no capacity to enforce a consequence, Hintz says.

Access to the procedure isnt equitable across society. Echoes of sterilizations checkered pastin which marginalized groups of women were forced to undergo the procedure, including women of color, women who were poor, and those living with disabilities or mental illnessesstill linger today. Black, Latina, and Indigenous women in the U.S. are up to twice as likely as white women to be approved for sterilization, while women with public or no health insurance are about 40% more likely to have the procedure than privately insured women.

The bottom line is that the way that this is legislated aroundand the way that these very subjective sorts of assessments are able to be madeis just a means of perpetuating this very white, wealthy, able-bodied, and cisgender idea of who ought to have children, says Hintz.

One corner of the internet in which those seeking the procedure can find advice and tips is the r/childfree community on Reddit. The subreddit has folders with extensive information on how to request the procedure, a collated list of doctors who will perform it, and a sterilization binder that members can take to their doctor with a template consent form and a form to list their reasons for wanting the procedure.

Alongside rising requests for permanent forms of birth control, the overturning of Roe has already triggered an uptick in the number of people seeking longer-lasting but nonpermanent birth control, such as intrauterine devices (IUDs). But the idea itself that birth controlpermanent or otherwisecould replace access to abortion is inherently flawed, says Krystale Littlejohn, an assistant professor of sociology at the University of Oregon whose work explores race, gender, and reproduction. Despite the fact that the majority of people who can get pregnant use some form of birth control, one in four women will have an abortion in their lifetime. This is why the just get your tubes tied or just get an IUD rhetoric that has emerged in the wake of Dobbs isnt helpful, she says.

For one, choosing these forms of birth control is not a trivial medical decision: Heavier, more painful periods and a potentially painful implantation procedureoften with no pain reliefare among the possible consequences of getting an IUD. Tubal ligations require an invasive surgical procedure and, as with any surgical procedure, can lead to complications.

In fact, the advice to use birth control can be seen as just another form of policing peoples bodies, Littlejohn says. When it comes to people suggesting that their friends or their loved ones get on long-acting birth control, I think that people believe that theyre helping other people, but what theyre really doing is encroaching on their human right to bodily autonomy, she says. Roes fall wont just mean that people with a uterus are forced to give birth, she says; its also about compelling them to use longer-acting or permanent forms of birth control.

A person living in a restrictive part of the U.S. may now feel compelled to seek out longer-term contraception or get their tubes tiedwhich is tantamount to compulsory birth control. Thats not the solution right now, she says. I think its really important that we dont try and fight reproductive injustice with reproductive coercion.

This article first appeared on Wired.

Originally Appeared on Glamour

Continue reading here:

Permanent Birth Control Is in Demand in the U.S.But Hard to Get - Yahoo Life

From everyday items and personal-care services to even basic clothing, there are several things thatcostwomen more money than men. And, on athread, people discuss and reveal the things that cost higher to women than men. Shall we see what people had to say? Read on.Source: Pexels

1. "Everything. There are times when things actually cost more money but other times it costs us our dignity, safety, health and welfare. We pay more all the time."

-laboogie72

2. "Period products and birth control."

-Vyrnoa

3. "Razors."

- aussiesis

4. "Hairdressers."

-Niamh1971

5. "Sterilization. It's more expensive, more invasive and has higher risks for women. In fact, a lot of younger childfree women get turned down by doctors who invalidate their personal decision regarding their own bodies with comments like "you're too young to know", "what if your hypothetical future husband wants kids", "but being a mother is the best thing a woman can be/ultimate thing she should want" and similar remarks."

-MissInfer

6. "BASIC underwear. While men might be comfortable in dollar store underwear, many women need 100% cotton or a special cut just to avoid infections."

-thelaughingpear

7. "Clothing in general. For example, it's almost impossible to find clothing with pockets large enough to avoid having to carry a purse. Having to buy purses is like a tax for women. Also, having to wear multiple layers to keep guys from staring at our chests. And if you don't wash them, dry cleaners will charge more for women's dress shirts than men's shirts, caught this under a misc category. They corrected it when I pointed it out. Also, for haircuts, I've had other women complain that they pay more for a haircut than a man, even though their hair is just as short and easy to cut/style."

-UsualAnybody1807

8. "Dating and sex! Theres so much more for us to lose/risk that will always cost us more both figuratively and literally in the end."

-RideExternal5752

9. "Swimwear."

-blushingpervert

10. "Anything regarding reproductive health - tampons, pads, birth control and having a baby."

-mountain_dog_mom

11. "Having sex. Our lives are pretty costly and are now at risk every time we have sex."

-Mcstoni

12. "Existence."

-QuickLimeGirl86

Read this article:

12 People Reveal The Things That Costs More For Women Than Men - ScoopWhoop

Whether or not to bring kidsand especially babiesto weddings can be a very sensitive issue. Strong arguments could be made for either case. However, when the happy couple explicitly ask their guests not to bring their kids, its usually best to honor their wishes. It is their wedding day after all. And theyre giving everyone plenty of notice to find a babysitter. Heck, some of the other guests might have hired certified professionals for their own kids!

Redditor u/babyweddingthrowaway shared what happens when guests dont think that the rules apply to them. She turned to the AITA community for their opinion on whether or not she was a jerk for bringing her 10-month-old baby to her cousins wedding, despite everyone having been asked not to do this.

Scroll down for the full story in the new moms own words and to read how other internet users reacted to the entire drama. Oh, and when youre done, wed like to hear from you, Pandas. Who did you think was in the wrong? How would you have handled the situation? Do you have any weddings coming up soon? Tell us all about it in the comments.

Image credits: Justin Luck (not the actual photo)

Image credits: Samantha Gades (not the actual photo)

Image credits: babyweddingthrowaway

Its pretty darn unusual for the AITA community to be so united in their YTA verdicts. In this particular case, a huge number of redditors thought that the mom was clearly in the wrong because she did the one thing parents were asked not to do. She brought her kid. The baby disrupted the ceremony. And the thing that the couple dreaded would happen actually happened.

The redditors defense was that shed RSVPd and told her cousin that shed be bringing her baby anyway. The groom and his bride didnt tell her no again because they didnt want to start any drama. Meanwhile, some of the other guests were upset because they thought the redditor was given special treatment.

In short, this entire situation shows what happens when even a single person thinks theyre above the general guidelines. We absolutely adore kids at weddings and we totally get parents wanting to love and protect their munchkins, but at the end of the day, if its a childfree wedding, its a childfree wedding. And demanding exemptions when others are in the exact same boat as you sounds a bit selfish.

Previously, Anna and Sarah, team leaders at The Wedding Society, stressed to Bored Panda that it is vital to respect the wishes of the marrying couple.

Whether it be that kids of a certain age are welcome, only specific children of a few family and friends, or no kids at all, guests should honor the couples wishes regarding kids at the ceremony.

Please dont take the inclusion or exclusion of your little ones personally (especially if the couple dont have kids of their own to fully understand your situation) and rememberas nice as it is to bring your babes along to the celebration, its also an awesome opportunity for a fun night off if youre asked to leave them with a sitter! Anna and Sarah said that parents should strive to look at some of the positive aspects of going to a childfree wedding. Its an opportunity to spend time with your partner, friends, and family. Its a date night in disguise.

For marrying couples, the etiquette can be trickier. Newborns really need to be with their parents so please dont ask for any babies under a few months to be left at home. Its perfectly reasonable to ask for parents of older children to take the night off and leave them with a sitter, but the fairest way to do this is to make a blanket rule for everyone rather than picking and choosing which kids can come and who cant.

See original here:

Am I The Jerk For Bringing My Baby To A Child-Free Wedding?

The financial services field has traditionally stayed away from taking public positions on politically fraught issues that could impact bottom lines and alienate prospective clients, but the Supreme Courts recent Dobbs v. Jackson Womens Health Organization decision relegating womens reproductive health care options to the states has heightened pressure on all American businesses to do just that.

The national wirehouses, with one exception,reacted swiftly to address public (and bipartisan) outrage, and made announcements of changes in corporate policies to cover employees who may be impacted by the decision.

But beyond a handful of outspoken advisors, independent b/ds and RIAs have remained largely silent.

Ross Gerber, the CEO of Gerber Kawasaki, a registered investment advisor in Southern California, said even before the Supreme Court decision, he received threats and personal attacks for expressing his belief in a womans right to make her own health care decisions. Even so, he said he gains more clients than he loses by advocating for the right.

There's a large portion of people in America that are perfectly fine with anything if they make money doing it, said Gerber. And in the advisor world, that is a majority of advisors. Theyre not going to do things that hurt their money or their assets but worrying about one of the women in their firm, and their right and access to abortion, is probably very far down on the list of things they're worried about compared to how they can cut costs or whatever.

Appalled and terrified, Catherine Arnet-Valega, whoruns LPL broker/dealer GreenBee Advisory in Boston, Mass., said she fears men are unaware of the negative impact the ruling will have on them and that she will encourage her daughters to consider the location and stance of potential employers as they embark upon their respective careers.

Liv Gagnon, co-founder of the diversity-in-finance organization Choir, said the financial industry no longer has the luxury of avoiding political issues related to the rights and health of their employees and clients.

Companies no longer have the option to remain apolitical, Gagnon said in an email to WealthManagement.com.In fact, if a companys leadership is truly under the impression that theyareapolitical, I expect their race and/or gender provide them the privilege to turn off current events to maintain business as usual. And further, they are prioritizing their personal fragility and fear of saying the wrong thing over the rights and healthcare of their employees.

Theres an old PR adage No comment is a comment, and I believe that sums up what leaders are facing right now, she said. As stakeholders, employees, clients and industry peers, we are looking for company leadership to stand up for their people. Perhaps they dont know exactly what to say or do, but not acknowledgingin any waythe human rights crisis we are in right now is not only tone deaf, it speaks volumes about where their alliances are.

Jay Zigmont, PhD, CFP and founder of Mississippi-based RIA Childfree Wealth, questioned whether advisor documentation might be subpoenaed for use against couples who choose to get an abortion, and whether widespread plans to pay for travel to access the service would remain legally viable. He also raised concerns about other communities at risk of losing civil rights, such as same-sex couples and transgender individuals.

A few independent firms have condemned the Dobbs decision and offered support to impacted employees. Virtually none have publicly supported the ruling.

We unapologetically support every womans right to control her own body, said Mary Beth Storjohann and Neela Hummel, co-CEOs at Southern California-based RIA Abacus Wealth Partners.

Storjohann and Hummel authored a post called Reproductive Rights are Human Rights on the firms website, calling out the lack of gender and racial diversity within the financial services industry, arguing that the Supreme Court ruling will exacerbate income inequality and challenging other industry professionals to speak up and ensure that all employees have equitable health care and advancement opportunities.

Abacus is currently working with its HR and legal departments to offer financial support for any employee, spouse or dependent who needs to travel for any health care servicesincluding reproductive and gender-affirming servicescovered by insurance but not available in their state.

Unfortunately, the pair noted, what was a constitutional right last week is now a private health decision that must be shared with employers. The privacy of our employees and their families is our top concern, so we are also creating an internal policy that allows for as much privacy as possible while accessing this benefit.

Adasina Social Capital, a San Francisco-based social justice investing firm, has issued two statements on the subjectthe first in response to the Texas abortion ban passed last fall and another when the Dobbs decision was first leaked in May.

Access to reproductive healthcare, including safe and legal abortion, is an issue of gender justice, economic justice and racial justice, Adasina stated. And the right to bodily autonomy is one of basic human dignity. The firm noted that reproductive rights remain a criterion for its Adasina Social Justice index, which supports investment in companies aligned with racial, gender, economic and climate justice initiatives.

Keith Beverly, CIO and managing partner of the Washington D.C.-based RIA Grid 202, released a statement on LinkedIn on Tuesday, expressing support for organizations such as Planned Parenthood and Power to Decide, as well as for efforts to elect more women to public office.

While the Dobbs decision is a significant blow to those of us who believe all women should have dominion over their own bodies, it said, it also underscores the necessity to organize and mobilize for the causes we hold dear.

With the exception of UBS, which has its headquarters in Switzerland, all major U.S. wirehouses publicly outlined changes to their health care plans to reimburse travel-related expenses in cases where a covered individual is unable to receive comprehensive reproductive care in their home state.

For Wells Fargo and Morgan Stanley, the changes will go into effect on July 1.

Bank of Americas Merrill Lynch said that it has expanded its list of medical services eligible for travel reimbursement to include cancer treatment, organ transplants, reproductive healthcare (including abortion) and mental health conditions.

In an industry already struggling with a lack of talent and a history of homogeneity, ignoring the current climate could be at a firms own peril, some observers say.

I do think it will change how female job-seekers approach their careers and location, said Arnet-Valega. I would not work for a company that does not support womens choice, and I would guide my four daughters to choose their employers and location taking into account the firm or organizations opinion on respecting a womans right to choose."

Leaders need to decideif they care about their employees and colleagues, and whether they are willing to be the type of leader who makes people feel seen and valued the type of leader who people want to work for, said Gagnon. Because the next generation of our workforce is not going to settle for less.

I think many companies want tosay the right things, said Gerber. But I think saying the right things and doing the right things are different things. I think there's a difference between crafting a great message and then a company saying to its female employees today that, no matter what, I'm going to make sure that you don't have this problem. That's what employees want to hear.

I do think in our industry, we represent trillions of dollars in assets and have tons of power that we don't use, he added, saying that he has personally put pressure on companies his firm is investing with to take a public position against the Dobbs decision.

We are in an industry known for staying quiet, wrote Storjohann and Hummel, a point of view reinforced by the lack of response from dozens of firms that were approached for this story.LPL, Raymond James, Edward Jones and Cetera were among the many firms that had not responded to questions regarding any corporate response to the decision by press time.

It is time to expand the table, invite in other voices, and find solutions that we simply cannot create by sitting in a circle with people who only look like us, they said.

Follow this link:

Responding to the Roe Rollback - Wealth Management

Since a draft opinion written by Justice Alito indicating that the Supreme Court would overturn Roe v. Wade was leaked, much of the debate has been philosophical, dealing with womens bodily autonomy versus the rights of the unborn, and what kind of different laws states might pass now that that the issue of abortion has been returned to elected officials. However, its also an issue with economic consequences. State-level abortion bans will affect the economy as a whole and women in particular in several different ways.

What effect, exactly, does legal abortion have on womens ability to partake in the economy?

This is a tricky question. One may think that studying womens labor force participation, salaries, and years of education before and after Roe v. Wade would provide some clues, but correlation does not equal causation. Many things changed during the 1970s that affected womens roles in the economy. Abortion is one variable, but attributing the entire post-1973 rise in womens labor force participation to legal abortion would be intellectually dishonest.

In recent decades, economists have approached this is through so-called natural experiments: Five states and the District of Columbia had already legalized abortion before Roe v Wade. Comparing the outcome for women in these states after abortion was legalized compared to the rest of the country (or comparing each state to a similar state that did not have legal abortion pre-Roe) can, at least in theory, allow us to isolate the effect that abortion legalization has on women in the economy and society as a whole.

Using this method, legalizing abortion reduced the number of teen mothers by 34 percent and teen brides by 20 percent, while maternal mortality among black women decreased by 30 to 40 percent.

Meanwhile, using the same methodology, economic researchers have found that legalized abortion increased womens schooling and employment rates, as well as labor force participation in general (especially for black women). Legal abortion also increased the share of women working in jobs covered by social security.

Given that natural experiments are held in high regard for their ability to establish causation rather than just correlation, one may think that this would settle the topic. Things, however, are more than a tad more complicated.

The main flaw with relying on these studies as an indicator for what kind of effect reversing Roe v. Wade may have on women is that they all rely on very old data. In 1970, an unplanned pregnancy that led to a woman becoming a single mother was devastating. The stigma was severe. There were few options for single mothers to continue with their education, at least not without relying on help from family, and single motherhood stifled career options. While there is little doubt that motherhood still imposes a cost on womens earnings and career prospects, this cost is not nearly as great as it was 50 years ago.

A half-centuryago, women who became pregnant out of wedlock faced immense social pressure to marry the father (though to be fair, men were also reluctantly marched down the aisle in shotgun weddings). This affected their economic outlook because marriage bars were still common. Such bars were outlawed by Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but it took time for employers to change their attitudes. An accidental pregnancy that caused a spontaneous, socially mandated wedding could very well force a woman out of the labor force. This is no longer the case.

Furthermore, discrimination against pregnant women remained legal until 1979. At the time Roe v. Wade was decided, a woman could still be fired legally if she became pregnant. This is part of what drove demand for abortion among educated women, as pregnancies were fully capable of ending promising careers. While no one can say that pregnancies do not affect career development, it is nowhere near as severe today as it was back then.

The second problem with these studies that are meant to instill the notion that a return to a pre-Roe America would be devastating to women in the economy, is that natural experiments by their very nature struggle with finding a proper control group. Out of the five jurisdictions) that had legalized abortion prior to Roe, four of themAlaska, California, New York and Hawaiihad and still have economies that look rather different from the rest of the country (the control group), with the latter three having a far greater service and professional sector than most other states. This is relevant as pregnancies and marriage mainly caused career disruption (or worse) to women in these sectors. It is quite likely that the natural experiments overstate the effect, as the control and treatment groups are not actually identical.

Third, in addition to changes in cultural attitudes toward single mothers and mothers in the workforce, technology has also made it easier to combine parenting with working. The pandemic has given a significant boost to the already-increasing number of remote jobs, which makes it easier for mothers to stay in the labor market.

Fourth, women have far greater access to contraceptives than they did in 1970. Abortion bans are almost certainly going to lead to changes in sexual behavior and risk-taking that were frankly not possible for many Americans back in 1970 when access to contraceptives was far more limited. This will also mitigate the actual impact of any restriction on abortion.

Finally, the pre-Roe abortion bans were far more effective than any modern abortion ban could realistically be. Out of the five states, only oneNew Yorkallowed non-state residents to have abortions. Pre-Roe, if you lived in a state without legal abortion, you could not simply travel to a state where it was legal, as you had to prove residency to be allowed to have an abortion in any of those states except New York. While more than half the states are likely to either ban or restrict abortion, those who do allow it are almost certainly going to allow abortion tourism. The effect of abortion bans on women will be smaller because the bans will be less effective (though traveling out of state will be admittedly be more difficult for poorer women).

And this brings us to the real, significant issue that pro-lifers now have to tackle: A post-Roe America needs to become a better place to have a family, and in particular a better place to be a mother. There is an image of Republicans as caring about babies only as long as they are in the womb, subsequently abandoning vulnerable mothers after persuading (or forcing) them not to have abortions. Even if this image is not entirely justified, more must be done to combat it. An America where becoming a mother is an unattractive option will never be able to enforce a ban on abortion.

To start with, a post-Roe America needs legally mandated, paid maternity leave. Only 25 percent of American workers in the private sector work for employees that offer paid parental leave (maternity, paternity or both). The loss of income from taking care of a newborn is a deterrent to having children, and indirectly provides an incentive to violate any ban on abortion. Family leave can be a contentious issue for conservatives, but Donald Trump signed a bill providing for paid parental leave for federal workers during his administration, and this is something that ought to be extended to private sector employees. (Abby McCloskey has written about a proposal that could enjoy bipartisan support for The Dispatch.)

Second, the cost of maternity care needs to be drastically reduced, and ideally such care should be unconditionally free. The prospect of going bankrupt or being indebted for life from medical debt stemming from a potentially complicated childbirth makes abortion more attractive. Even without a European-style universal health care system in the U.S., there are ways to address this, whether by increasing government subsidies to ACA plans, allowing all plans to provide maternity care without deductibles and co-insurance, or by funding maternity care through a separate program.

Its best to think of children as a public good. Everyone, even the childless, benefit or will benefit from children being born today, as we all eventually end up relying on the existence of future generations, both to provide caretakers and to keep entitlements such as Social Security and Medicare solvent. The U.S. allows its childfree population to free-ride on the parentsenjoying all the benefits of children being around, while carrying hardly any of the costs.

Third, the cost of domestic adoptions must be drastically reduced, and funding for family and child protective services drastically increased. While there is little doubt that CPS agencies often display misguided priorities and in some cases need to be reined in, there is also little doubt that fighting child abuse and neglect is costly. In places where abortion is no longer legal, many more women will inevitably end up giving birth to children they either do not want or are not capable of taking care of. While tax credits cover some of the costs of adoption, couples looking to adopt still have to make significant upfront payments before getting those credits (which again, only cover some of the costs). CPS agencies need to have the resources necessary to monitor and ensure the welfare of at-risk children.

A great danger with the reversal of Roe v. Wade is that Republicans, many of whom have merely paid lip service to the pro-life cause, will fail to understand or fail to accept the magnitude of changes that will need to be made to successfully transition America into the post-Roe era. The backlash may be severe, and the long-awaited overturning of Roe v. Wade could quickly turn into a pyrrhic victory for the pro-life movement, killing its political credibility for time eternal. Pro-life groups, having spent half a century lobbying for the appointment of anti-abortion judges, must now turn their focus to ensuring politicians make the practical changes necessary to make a pro-life America feasible.

The rest is here:

The Economics of Abortion in a Post-Roe World - The Dispatch

In the old days, there was a tradition in many countries, and even an official rule, that after reaching a certain age, people who did not start a family or have children were subject to a special tax or paid fines. Today, our society has come very far from such views, and sometimes family people envy their single friends.

Of course, we in no way want to say that family and children are bad. On the contrary, its amazing, but lets admit to ourselves can any mother or father say theyve never dreamed for a moment of returning to their childless days for at least a couple of hours? They definitely have.

Just recently, blogger McErin wrote a tweet that literally confirms what we have already said. The woman is the only one in her office who is not married and has no children, and when colleagues discussed a bunch of family matters over the past weekend, she simply told them that she went to the farmers market and thats it. As the original poster wrote, after her words, three of her coworkers gasped and one even cried

The tweet almost immediately went viral, with 212.5K likes and 10.1K retweets so far. And, well, almost a thousand people decided to share similar stories from their own experience.

More info: Twitter

Image credits: Roger Mommaerts (not the actual photo)

Image credits: colleen_eileen

Image credits: colleen_eileen

Image credits: Ceralith1

In her article Advantages and Disadvantages of Being Childfree on the Psychology Today website, Ph.D. Ellen Walker lists three major benefits of being childless. First, you have time for self-care and for other relationships. Second, you can dedicate your time to your career or to other interests that will help the world as a whole.

Finally, the world will be less crowded and resources less depleted. However, this position also has its own disadvantages its just that at certain moments, the benefits are more noticeable.

Image credits: RealTylerRiggs

Image credits: spittykitty543

Image credits: colleen_eileen

Image credits: suzigwinn

Image credits: colleen_eileen

By the way, the Original Poster herself noted that her initial tweet should be taken as nothing more than an attempt to perceive the situation with humor. The fact is that, as is often the case on the internet, a heated argument broke out in the comments between staunch childfree people and adherents of traditional family values.

Image credits: Marco Zanferrari (not the actual photo)

Image credits: IggsterB

Image credits: BrendaGlasser

Image credits: karen_eggleson

In fact, the most important thing here is to have respect for those who one position or another, and try not to judge people simply because their lifestyle or beliefs do not match yours. As one of the authors comments wrote, I like that I have a family, but I totally respect those who do not want to have children.

Image credits: bunnysetgo

Image credits: FakeDariaM

Image credits: druidbros

Leslie-Ashburn Nardo, a psychology professor at Indiana University, co-wrote an academic study on this very topic. Relative to targets who had chosen to have two children, voluntarily childfree women and men were penalized by perceivers, says professor Nardo.

Image credits: MiaVGirl

Image credits: WendyGrahn

Image credits: CatarinaAnd1

Image credits: amyisquitebusy

Specifically, they were perceived as leading less fulfilling lives than do people who had chosen to have children, notes Nardo. Moreover, their decision to forgo parenthood, arguably individuals most personal choice, evoked moral outrage anger, disgust, and disapproval. Actually, it is believed that parents attempts to self-realize through their own children harm not only the kids, but also the parents themselves.

Image credits: pdxinertia

Image credits: Noworl8ter

Image credits: VandrewsSMC

Image credits: InfoPro_Tasha

By the way, sometimes it happens that people who decide not to have children become active pet lovers, and even replace parenthood with them. Sometimes this leads to funny situations for example, as with this dog mom, the heroine of this post on Bored Panda. And we, as usual, highly appreciate your comments and our own stories on this topic.

See original here:

Susan Said She Hopes I Get Hit By A Car?: Discussion Ensues After Woman Shares How Being The Only Single Childless Person At Work Is Wild - Bored...

What is a DINK? Some couples are embracing a childfree life where they have more control over what their income covers. (Photo: Carly Caramanna)

We've all seen the memes ... and even the bumper stickers. Colorful displays proclaiming "I'm a FUNCLE," or celebrating being mom to "fur babies" only. There are countless ways some share that they're enthusiastically certain they are living their best life thanks to being childfree. And once these happy souls, of which, I am one, find a partner, there's another term that comes into play: DINK.

What's a DINK? It's an acronym that stands for "dual income, no kids," and is widely interpreted as two people living together as partners with no children of their own (and no plans to have kids) who are thriving in their careers and personal lives.

The origins of the clever acronym aren't clear and it's not a term frequently mentioned in popular culture, but, like The Goonies, G.I. Joe figurines and the Walkman, the phrase is said to have been coined in the 80s, particularly during the rise of yuppie (young urban professional) culture.

If you were a fan of the 90s animated television series, Doug, you may even remember the Funnies' lovable neighbors, Bud and Tippi Dink. Yes, their surname is a reference to that DINK: The series creator, Jim Jinkins, even confirmed it in a 2016 Decider interview.

The stigma placed around one's very personal decision about whether or not to have children is likely why the term floats so far below the radar but the DINK community is a proud one complete with their very own symbol emblazoned on bumper stickers.

My husband and I do not consider ourselves to be selfish individuals, but instead, we are selfish with the time we have together for the sake of our relationship. For us, that means not having children. (Photo: Carly Caramanna)

I would know. I'm a proud DINK. My husband and I are both in our late 30s and have chosen the DINK life and no, we aren't those "married to our career" types. While we both enjoy success in our fields, we enjoy a deep bond that I can't imagine would be possible if I had to give so much of myself to caring for a child. We are not selfish individuals, but instead, selfish with the time we have together for the sake of our relationship.

Don't get me wrong, we love children and have great relationships with our many younger extended family members and the children of close friends. In fact, with the extra time (and money) we have from not having children of our own, we have the ability to forge extra-special bonds with these children in our lives.

Story continues

My husband and I share a love of travel and are able to explore for a good chunk of the year, including several trips a month and at least one long-term international trip a year all on our own dime (no trust funds here). With our jobs, we also typically spend a few months a year living in Los Angeles to work on our creative endeavors. Simply put: We love the lives we have proudly designed for ourselves and have a darn good time along the way. Most importantly, we feel fulfilled in every sense of the word.

In recent times, I've discovered that we're not alone. In addition to circles of friends that share this similar mindset, there's an entire online community dedicated to removing the pressures and stigmatism surrounding the subject.

Dania Casellas, a 33-year-old microbiologist and online fitness coach, resides in Florida with her partner. Together, they have created a safe and inspiring space on Instagram for others like them to share the daily humorous (and often reluctant) encounters they face as DINKS.

"I knew in my early 20s that I for sure had no desire to have kids," Casellas tells Yahoo Life. "I don't get excited over babies but I'm good with kids. I have a silly personality and enjoy being around them but taking on the huge responsibility of raising someone just doesn't appeal to me. I was told I was crazy, selfish and that I would regret it. I'm now 33, childfree and living my best life."

That best life she speaks of? Casellas spent years living in New York City on a journey of self discovery and she and her partner now enjoy the spontaneity that DINK life brings, like making last-minute dinner plans, playing in soccer leagues and taking trips to Universal Studios Orlando.

"I think having kids would limit us in the activities we enjoy and the quiet living space we love," Casellas adds. "We hope to be homeowners soon. With the way things are right now, I'm not sure we could afford a home and kids. Adulting is expensive."

As today's society continues to see a growing number of issues on the rise overall uncertainty, crippling debt, a poor housing and job market and even climate change financial, cultural and biological issues come into play when considering parenthood.

Still, arriving at the decision to not have children wasn't easy given the social pressures she faced. "I'm basically the only childfree-by-choice person I know outside of social media," Casellas shares. "Friends and family around me were starting families and honestly I almost started to doubt my choice. I needed support so I started listening to books about being childfree by choice." She credits books like A Childfree Happily Ever After: Why More Women are Choosing Not to Have Childrenby Tanya Williams with making peace with her decisions, as well as the discovery of social media communities.

"When I discovered people sharing their childfree lives on Instagram, I felt like I was going to therapy," she says. "Childfree people absolutely live healthy, fulfilling and purposeful lives. It's an amazing and supportive community to be a part of."

Childfree Millennial is another Instagram-based DINK support system, run by partners Marcela and Michael, ages 26 and 31 respectively, who live in Kansas City, Missouri and prefer to keep their last names anonymous.

"It was about three years ago that I came to the realization and had a light bulb moment that kids weren't a mandatory thing in life," Marcela says. "Crazy, I know I just didn't grow up being told this or having any examples of people who didn't have kids in their 20s and 30s."

"When I had this epiphany," she continues, "I couldn't contain my excitement because of how relieved I was. I wasn't going to have to do something that I had been dreading my entire teenage and adult years."

Today, Marcella says she wakes up every day with a smile on her face knowing she can confidently accomplish all that she sets out to do. "I find myself investing more in creativity, exploring the world and becoming a better person," she says.

She uses her platform as a way to let others know it's OK. "Three years ago, I wish I had someone to look up to like me in the childfree space," she explains. "Someone who was open in talking about their childfree journey and how amazing and inspiring your life can be, regardless of what others are saying about it."

If you see a decal like this on a nearby car, you're probably encountering a DINK. (Photo: Rachel Wiedmayer)

As many work toward removing the stigma of going childfree, proud DINKS are not shy when it comes to displaying their status. One way of letting the world know where you stand in the child department is the popular trend of displaying a bumper sticker outlining your "family." On a DINK's car, those stick figure children are are depicted as little money bags.

Rachel Wiedmayer is one of the top-rated sellers of DINK bumper stickers on her Etsy store, WiedMakers. "I am half of a DINK couple," Wiedmayer says. "My husband and I do not (and will not ever) have children of the human variety. We have two dogs and a cat. I decided to start selling these decals because I look for designs that align with my views and interests."

And there are obvious financial benefits along the way to not having children. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, it is projected that it will cost parents, on average, $233,610 to raise a child born in 2015.

Jay Zigmont is founder of financial planning service Childfree Wealth and author of Portraits of Childfree Wealth. Zigmont focuses his client base almost exclusively on childfree couples, a trend he believes we can expect to see more of since, as the number of childfree families grows, so does the need for financial plans that aren't tailored towards those with children.

Jay Zigmont works as a financial planner for childfree couples, a trend he says is growing. (Photo: Jay Zigmont)

"Financial planning for childfree individuals is different," Zigmont explains. "Most financial rules of thumb or general plans assume you have children. With 11% of the U.S. population over age 55 being childfree (and that number growing in younger generations), we as financial planners need to be sure to adjust to this growing need."

It's not all yachts and spontaneous international travels for this growing number of individuals. "Being childfree does not automatically mean you are rich," adds Zigmont. "The difference is that if a childfree person is barely keeping their head above water, if they had a kid they would drown."

Want lifestyle and wellness news delivered to your inbox? Sign up here for Yahoo Lifes newsletter.

Go here to read the rest:

What's a DINK? Here's what its like to be a couple that revels in having 'dual income, no kids' - Yahoo Philippines News

A 29-year-old woman thought she knew everything there was to know about her boyfriend, but she recently learned he kept an enormous secret from her throughout the duration of their 2-year relationship.

She and her boyfriend have both agreed to remain childfree. She doesnt want kids of her own, as she had to raise her 8 younger siblings all alone, and quite frankly, that was enough parenting for her.

Shes looking forward to now being able to live her life on her own terms and do whatever she wants.

My boyfriend is child-free because he said he never wanted kids and never saw himself as a dad, she explained.

He was the one to even initiate the topic saying it was important that he not enter a relationship with someone that wanted kids which I loved since before him EVERY single guy Ive ever been with wanted children so I just felt like I would have to compromise and have kids in order to experience that love.

A month ago, she found out that her boyfriend is hardly childfree. She began noticing that her boyfriend was doing his best to prevent her from seeing what he was doing on his phone, and he was no longer answering calls in front of her.

Then, she saw one evening on his laptop that he was talking to a guy named Ben and some girl in a group chat.

As she flipped through the messages between her boyfriend, Ben, and this girl, she was shocked to see that the people her boyfriend had been speaking to were referring to him as their dad.

She kept digging and found out that Ben was 12 and had reached out to her boyfriend first, claiming to be his son.

Sign up for Chip Chicks newsletter and get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox.

Visit link:

Back In High School, Her Boyfriend Gave Up 2 Children For Adoption But He Kept This A Secret From Her - Chip Chick