niledynodely

I get the impression that a lot of the assumptions which underlie government policy re: women, employment, childcare etc are wrong but I want to find out if it is just me that thinks like that or if other women do too. So I put some questions up in the drawing room based on a newspaper article I saw on the subject. Anyway I am sort of most interested in the responses of people actively engaged in childcare so I thought I would mention it here in the hope you might go to the drawing room and have a look. Thanks

louisiana Wrote: > > There's all kinds of assumptions there already. > Want vs need? > Home-office-based workers? (e.g. consultancy of > many kinds, writers and editors) > > I would love to say I don't want to work *and* I > don't have to. But I do have to work, though I > don't want to. And I work from home. Hi Louisiana - they aren't my assumptions though. I think those are the assumptions of women in government. I get the impression they think we all actually WANT to work when actually we HAVE TO and if there were things that could be done so that we didn't HAVE TO work (particulary when our children are very small) that would be great. For example - I think it was Frank Field he suggested that if we got many years of child benefit condensed into for example the first 3 years of our child's life - and then didn't get it later (when they were bigger and it was easier for us to work) - that would be really good cause we wouldn't have to work when we didn't really want to. I get the impression the government are working on the wrong assumptions and that is what I want to find out.....

Hello womanofdulwich - thank you very much for answering all those questions - I am interested in finding out how other women view things because I often get the feeling I am way out of line with other people and want to find out if that is really the case. Like you I don't think that inequality is about unjust discrimination...there is exactly inequality for the reasons you give. But because of that I don't understand why the government go to such pains to ensure equal representation of women at all levels. If you have only got a very small pool of women applying for the very high powered jobs why on earth should there be equal representation at all levels? If the govt insist on it as HH seems determined to do we will probably end up with women being unfairly promoted. With question 8 I am really puzzled by how withdrawing benefits would lead women to having more children? I don't get that. I don't see why the state should encourage women to work. It seems to me that there is a huge really important role to be done in the home and community and if more of us were around I think children would be a lot happier. (by the way I agree with most of what you say but I am just picking on the bits I disagree with cause I am contrary and find disagreement more interesting). And I also don't think extended school are a good idea because I think it is hard for children to spend so much time of the day outside of the home. The children's society did a really good report 'A good childhood' and I think that one of the things that came out was the children wanted their parents to spend more time with them. I really like what you say on number 6.

> The solution would be Toby Young-style > "Comprehensive Grammars" - all pupils are in > together but streaming exists within subject > groups to allow the brightest to forge ahead and > extra attention to be given to those struggling. > > The other major change I would like to see in > education is that grades are not based on absolute > marks but are a percentage or banding result. > Grades are not there to tell you how well you've > done per se, they are there to tell you how well > you have done compared to everyone else. If > everyone get's A* it says nothing about how clever > you are compared to your peers. Exams are no > easier or harder now than they were 50 years ago - > just differently graded. Only the top 10% (as an > example) should be given an 'A', not all of those > scoring 90% in an exam. I think that Toby Young solution sounds terrible. The whole problem with comprehensives was they set up one type of educational system (basically academic) and with it prioritised one system of values. Other countries value vocational skills like carpentry, baking, plumbing, building and because they properly value them they properly train people in them and these people then value themselves. And because they properly value them people actually want to learn those skills so if they aren't academic they have somewhere else to turn without feeling that they have in any way failed. I think competitive educational systems are fine as long as there are other roads to travel along if you don't want to enter that particular rat race. And another spin off is if you properly train a workforce you don't have to nick skilled people who have been trained up at the expense of tax payers from other countries.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > To be honest the article raises some good points, > but the bit which stuck in the throat a little was > the implication that men and women are not suited > to doing the same types of jobs. I really don't > think you can make those sorts of generalisations. Well I know that you get women who can do men's jobs just as well or better than men and vice-versa but in general terms we are different from each other aren't we? Like women do tend to work with people more (e.g if they are in a business often they are in HR) and men more with things (engineering,plumbing building etc). And I don't think those differences are just because of culture and sexism and stuff. Also I notice my male other half like if he gets treated badly he just brushes it off and carries on whereas I would be inclined to say I would never work with that person again and I think that is perhaps a 'gendered' response - women might take things more personally. Also another thing I notice is that men don't have as many problems disagreeing with each other as women do...all those things I think could affect suitability for particular types of jobs??

I was interested in this article by Minette Marin http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/minette_marrin/article7060971.ece#comment-have-your-say where I found the following paragraph: "Harman?s thinking, like the feminist orthodoxy in the government, is based on the following assumptions, which have always seemed quite wrong to me. First, that all women want to work (for money, outside the home). Second, that all women, including mothers, ought to work. Third, that all women want to do and are equally suited to doing the same work as men. Fourth, that if the number of women working in an organisation is less than 50% of the total, that is in itself evidence that women are being unjustly discriminated against. Fifth, that motherhood is a problem that makes it difficult for women to work. Sixth, that the problem of motherhood can easily be fixed by paid childcare, subsidised if necessary by the state. Seventh, that what all mothers want above all is ?affordable childcare? to enable them to work: children don?t need much of their attention. And finally, that it is for the state to sort out all such family matters" I would really like to know what truth there is in these assumptions and so have translated them into 8 questions. Any responses to any of the questions would be much appreciated! 1. Do you want to work (for money, outside the home)? 2. Do you feel that all women including mothers ought to work for money outside the home? 3. Do we tend towards health, teaching, social or people oriented types of work because we prefer it or because that is the main option available to us? 4. Do you think men and women are suited to doing the same types of jobs? 5. The unequal representation of women at higher levels of the workforce ? is this a result of unjust discrimination? 6. Do you see motherhood as a problem which makes it difficult for you to work? 7. Do you think the problem of motherhood can be easily fixed by paid childcare subsdised if necessary by the state? 8. Do you think it is up to the state to sort out such matters?