... a few days ago there was a post on DU (can't find it... I time out if I search anything but the subject), reporting that Warren enemies were pointing out that at one time she cited pregnancy as a reason for losing her job and at another time lack of certain requirements. Does anyone remember that? Can anyone clarify what's going on?

Note - not trying to attack Warren. See my preference below.

tia
las

edit: https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287303161#post5 Ah! Here's the story that the OP's article doesn't seem to reference.

and the OP kept insisting that Elizabeth should "tweak" her story.

I am presuming good faith on that OP's part. But still, I was taken aback that anyone - especially any woman who has borne children and lived through that era - would think that this was a big deal.

Apparently, some have either no memories ... or too short a memory.

I am NOT one of them. And I do NOT believe that I am alone.

I wish I could presume good faith, but the attacks don't just come from the right, and DU doesn't really have true moderation anymore.

We shall overcome! We are supporting a great candidate!

Most of the teachers (particularly in the earlier grades) and support staff were women. Never saw a single one who was visibly pregnant.

The people who came at Warren on this, and it was from both sides, are going to regret it IMO.

eta: you probably never saw one who was visibly pregnant because many women don't show until much later in their pregnancies.

I remember being at my final check-up for my 2nd son - at nearly 9 mo pregnant - and the woman next to me, who was showing much more than I, was bemoaning the fact that she still had three months to go! When she asked and I told her that I was due the following week, she literally could not believe me.

The other reason is because some were fortunate enough to have timed the births to occur during the summer vacation.

of how this works, which is not very well at all! But I do remember wondering when the baby would start showing the first time around and being surprised both by how long it took and how quickly it grew post-baby bump.

Warren’s four-month/six-month differential in terms of her interactions with school administrators makes sense to me IOW.

These “reporters” will go on to the next thing and leave a lot of pissed off Warren supporters in their wake. We won’t forget the “quality” of their work when they come round next time.

may have made some undecided women take another good hard look at her!

The situation is so relatable ... and yes, even today ... just as the article notes in the highlighted para.

Ah, unintended consequences!

... that DU doesn't get swept up in ideological slanting of history. I don't disbelieve your report that none of your teachers was visibly pregnant. Maybe they just weren't or maybe they did get asked to leave. But my fifth grade teacher, in the fifties, taught until her baby was born.

NOTE This is NOT meant to debunk Warren's report of her experience. I'm sure it happened just like that all over the country. Just not all the time.

ask them if they think everyone who has resigned form their jobs in the Trump administration did so voluntarily.

There's a term for this: "They got resigned."