Feminists and women's rights in general

mercipourlevenin924:

agreed fully deb, and one other thing cigarettes and suicide, why must you feel the need to point out that you live in the richest part of town, is it because you are unsatisfied with your life and you need to give yourself an ego boost? It's seriously way immature

Hey , It's not like Ciggaretts and suicide rubbed it in your face or looked down on anyone because the didn't have as good house.

Deb:

First off, please don't disrespect my Girl - she didn't disrespect you, she defended me.

Well she's not very tactful in the process. Defending and disrespecting aren't mutually exclusive - whether she intended to or not, she accomplished both tasks.

Deb:

You are getting offended, yet it is who did all the judging. You just went ahead and assumed that every working mother is attempting to climb some corporate ladder - have you ever even SEEN a poor person?

I never said 'every' working mother is blah blah blah. I said, from MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, which is all I can speak for, that most women who go back to work VERY SOON after having children are doing it because they feel some stupid need to 'prove themselves' at work, and therefore don't have the best interests of their child at heart, more themselves.
And yes, I've seen a poor person. I've been one. A lot of my friends still are. The difference is, they know they can't afford kids, so they don't have them. I knew that if I had kids I couldn't afford, I'd have to pay money to put them in daycare so I could go out and work - yet more money that I didn't have, and couldn't afford to spend even if I did.

Deb:

Your perspective seems skewed to me, especially since you are quick to point out that you live in one of the most expensive parts of town. Surely this is your choice as well, no? You could most certainly commute.

I don't live in the most expensive PART of town. I live in one of the most expensive TOWNS, period. Granted, we don't live in the worst suburb in town, but that's solely for the safety and wellbeing of our daughter - and by no means do we live in the most prestigious suburb. We live in an average suburb, since you're all so interested. For the record, only about 38,000 people call this town home, and there literally is no such thing as 'city' - it's just a bunch of houses, a couple of shopping centres, and some other businesses. So don't jump down my neck about living in 'suburbia' or whatever - this whole town IS suburbs, with a mall plunked somewhere in the western area of town. Hell, our airport is about 500m from my house, right in the middle of suburbia.
Again, not my choice - I was raised here from childhood, and since my husband and I have few qualifications that would enable us to get decent salaries, we have decided for the meantime to just stay where we are, knowing that his income is enough to pay the bills and allow us a comfortable enough existence, rather than risking a move to another town where he may not be able to gain as good a job as what he's in now. Cheaper housing usually means there is less work, or less well-paid work, in the area, so our chances of moving to another town and maintaining the income that we get now, is pretty much about as good as our chances of being struck by lightning.
As far as commuting, well, as I said - zero public transport in the area, and the nearest town where any work is available (ie the nearest town that has more than three houses and an old pub), is two hours by car. Again, even if one of us COULD get a high-enough paying job elsewhere, it certainly wouldn't be worth the tank and a half of fuel EVERY DAY to get there and back.

Nouvelle Vague:

Hey , It's not like Ciggaretts and suicide rubbed it in your face or looked down on anyone because the didn't have as good house.

Have you made it your only purpose on INO to just argue with me about everything? If you followed the discussion from the beginning, you would see what a bunch of us were objecting to. Are you a working mother, by any chance?

Deb:

Have you made it your only purpose on INO to just argue with me about everything? If you followed the discussion from the beginning, you would see what a bunch of us were objecting to. Are you a working mother, by any chance?

Look closer. Did I quote you? I forgot I had to ask your permission to post in a thread here.

And once again I am male

Cigarettes And Suicide:

I never said 'every' working mother is blah blah blah. I said, from MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, which is all I can speak for, that most women who go back to work VERY SOON after having children are doing it because they feel some stupid need to 'prove themselves' at work, and therefore don't have the best interests of their child at heart, more themselves. And yes, I've seen a poor person. I've been one. A lot of my friends still are. The difference is, they know they can't afford kids, so they don't have them. I knew that if I had kids I couldn't afford, I'd have to pay money to put them in daycare - yet more money that I didn't have, and couldn't afford to spend even if I did.

Well, my family is considered to be lower middle class (i.e. the working poor, basically; barely keeping our heads above water.) Your personal experience is limited then to the people that you know? If so, that is a very poor perspective. Are you suggesting as well that I should have aborted my son rather than have him, since I didn't happen to be at prime financial status when I "fell" pregnant with him? Sometimes, as I said, life just throws you a curveball, and you do the best you can with it. Your statement about daycare options being equivalent to "having children you can't afford" is ignorant as well - we couldn't afford full-time daycare as you are imagining it either; we hired women in the neighborhood, bartered for a few hours a day, asked our parents to help; whatever we had to do to swing it. The problem here is that you make blanket statements; you don't consider what means people have or what they do to make things work.

Cigarettes And Suicide:

I don't live in the most expensive PART of town. I live in one of the most expensive TOWNS, period. Again, not my choice - I was raised here from childhood, and since my husband and I have few qualifications that would enable us to get decent salaries, we have decided for the meantime to just stay where we are, knowing that his income is enough to pay the bills and allow us a comfortable enough existence, rather than risking a move to another town where he may not be able to gain as good a job as what he's in now. Cheaper housing usually means there is less work, or less well-paid work, in the area, so our chances of moving to another town and maintaining the income that we get now, is pretty much about as good as our chances of being struck by lightning. As far as commuting, well, as I said - zero public transport in the area, and the nearest town where any work is available (ie the nearest town that has more than three houses and an old pub), is two hours by car. Again, even if one of us COULD get a high-enough paying job elsewhere, it certainly wouldn't be worth the tank and a half of fuel EVERY DAY to get there and back.

I don't accept that, I'm sorry. It's a tradeoff; higher housing prices, higher fuel costs. Same difference.

Nouvelle Vague:

I forgot I had to ask your permission to post in a thread here. And once again I am male.

Save your sarcasm, and the question is a fair one. I frequently ask men if they have ever been pregnant when they seek to have a "pro-life" opinion, for instance.

I hate to sound rude, but can this discussion perhaps get more on topic? Especially the sparring between several people here - it's almost getting personal, and that's not really the point of discussions, fullstop. I'm no mod obviously, but maybe it should stop before it gets too out of hand....

Yes;Indeed;True:

What gets me is that people think feminism is an all-consuming label. Like I'm a feminist, and therefore I have the attributes of being a self-righteous lesbian who shoves my beliefs down your throat and crucifies you for having a penis. It's the other way around. I would be a self-righteous person who is a lesbian and a feminist and shoves my beliefs down your throat and crucifies you for having a penis.(I'm of course not saying this is the case, I'm just using it as an example from another post). I am not solely a feminist, I am person with one of the attributes of being a feminist as well as being a vegan,environmentally conscious,politically opinionated, passionate about all forms of art and anything expressive, ect.ect. It's not something that defines a person, and I think if more people understood that than feminism would be a much more excepted concept. I doubt many of the people I speak to every day know that I am a feminist because I have never spoken to them about woman's rights in general.

Yes, I completely agree. I'm pretty much in the same boat; I am a feminist, but I don't really make a point of going around and making a song and dance about it. Sometimes I may get into discussions with people, especially at uni, about feminism and issues surrounding it, and I would then probably tell them. But I most certainly don't like to make men, for example, feel guilty or bad about anything.

I actually get a feeling that a lot of men are sort of... scared of feminists, if that makes sense. Only because of things one hears in the media, and beat-up stories about radical feminists who apparently go around having a go at all men. I think feminism is quite misunderstood, and it's unfortunate.

Deb:

I don't accept that, I'm sorry. It's a tradeoff; higher housing prices, higher fuel costs. Same difference.

I'm sorry. Did that last bit not make any sense to you?
Let me clarify: We live here. My husband earns around $40k a year. We move to some bumf*** town where the only work is seasonal fruit-picking, and yeah, the houses are cheaper, but not that much cheaper that we can afford to live on $15k a year. Just remember that I'm not the sole decision maker in my household - my husband is the one who makes the majority of money decisions, and if you suggested to him that we move to a town where he earned less money and lived in a total dump of a house, his response would be to laugh in your face and offer to call the doctors to bring you a straitjacket. Because in his opinion, you'd be certifiable.

Either way, you don't have to accept anything I say, that's what I've been saying all along. But, since you're so keen on telling me how wrong my OPINION (and that's all it is, not a fricking gospel truth or anything) is, I'll give you an argument for argument's sake. Come on, it's only the discussion board - I just chill out here when I have some free time and feel like blathering. If you really take it that seriously then maybe you need to relax.

Mindfuck:

I hate to sound rude, but can this discussion perhaps get more on topic? Especially the sparring between several people here - it's almost getting personal, and that's not really the point of discussions, fullstop. I'm no mod obviously, but maybe it should stop before it gets too out of hand....

Thank-you.

Mindfuck:

I'm pretty much in the same boat; I am a feminist, but I don't really make a point of going around and making a song and dance about it... I actually get a feeling that a lot of men are sort of... scared of feminists, if that makes sense. Only because of things one hears in the media, and beat-up stories about radical feminists who apparently go around having a go at all men. I think feminism is quite misunderstood, and it's unfortunate.

I would have to agree with you on that one. You called me out on that earlier, and as I said, I understand what the concept of feminism is about, but there is just too much bull floating around painting feminists as the radical ones. I guess because someone who is rational about feminism, like yourself, probably doesn't necessarily identify as being a feminist, or doesn't go around shouting it from the rooftops. The ones who do, are the ones who tend to take it too far at times.

Cigarettes And Suicide:

Let me clarify: We live here. My husband earns around $40k a year. We move to some bumf*** town where the only work is seasonal fruit-picking, and yeah, the houses are cheaper, but not that much cheaper that we can afford to live on $15k a year. Just remember that I'm not the sole decision maker in my household - my husband is the one who makes the majority of money decisions, and if you suggested to him that we move to a town where he earned less money and lived in a total dump of a house, his response would be to laugh in your face and offer to call the doctors to bring you a straitjacket. Because in his opinion, you'd be certifiable.

Either way, you don't have to accept anything I say, that's what I've been saying all along. But, since you're so keen on telling me how wrong my OPINION (and that's all it is, not a fricking gospel truth or anything) is, I'll give you an argument for argument's sake. Come on, it's only the discussion board - I just chill out here when I have some free time and feel like blathering. If you really take it that seriously then maybe you need to relax.

I am doing my best to keep my temper in check, but understand this: I am responding to blanket statements that you have made, and since you keep referring to this AS a discussion, then you must include my responses as part of that discussion. A discussion is a two-way affair. I am quite relaxed, thank you very much, and I would never suggest that you go live in poverty - nor should you suggest that there is only one way to skin a cat. I saw your introduction on Golden Girls board and I admired it. That open-mindedness on your part was quite refreshing; we ALL miss our children when we're away, but having to pay our bills is just a sucky reality that we all have to face. Some of us are blessed enough to do so with less difficulty than others, but at the end of the day, isn't it it the QUALITY, not the QUANTITY of time that we spend with our children that matters?

Back onto the true subject of feminism: while there are most certainly radicals, as there are in all walks of life, I do believe that the point has always been toward equality. Martin Luther King advocated the same for African Americans, yet there are those who see fit to twist his words in order to accommodate their own latent racism, which I personally believe would disappoint him.

It's unfortunate that any minority group (and yes, technically women are considered minorities, even though there are not necessarily less women than men on the planet) has to assert itself as separate beings, but that's really the only way that change is accomplished, and even then, holding onto that change proves to be an uphill battle. I personally am horrified that Roe v. Wade is even being considered for overturn. The matter at hand is not whether or not you "agree" with abortion, it's about whether or not a woman who has decided to have one anyway is entitled to a safe, sterile environment.

Deb:

I saw your introduction on Golden Girls board and I admired it. That open-mindedness on your part was quite refreshing; we ALL miss our children when we're away, but having to pay our bills is just a sucky reality that we all have to face. Some of us are blessed enough to do so with less difficulty than others, but at the end of the day, isn't it it the QUALITY, not the QUANTITY of time that we spend with our children that matters?

May I now extend the olive branch to you?
Honestly, my intentions here are not to offend or upset people who have to live their lives a certain way, dictated by conditions that are out of their personal control. I totally agree with you, that sometimes life throws you curveballs, and you just have to make do. I'm sorry if I took things too far, but I just hate it when people try to tell me that what I'm doing with my life is wrong or stupid, just because it's not 'typical' in today's society (and let me tell you, stay-at-home parents seem to be a real anachronism in this day and age - I've even had people I thought were good friends suggest, and not in a nice way, that I must be rorting social security and getting welfare benefits that I'm not entitled to in order to survive on one income, and remain above the poverty line).
I do have a tendency to make 'blanket statements' or generalisations, but I don't apologise for those. Naturally I know that not every case is how I describe it, but I must be getting my information from somewhere, so I use what I have and keep in mind that it's not true 100% of the time. That being said, I do get tired of being attacked by other people for making generalisations, instead of taking six hours to write out EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE I know of where situations have differed from another. I don't bother, because it's too time-consuming. I always state that it's merely a generalisation, and if I forget to, I'm happy to add the disclaimer later on.

Either way, I do agree with you on some of your points, and I'm sorry if I've offended you. I appreciate that you noticed my intro on GG, and let me tell you that it is quite honestly the true way I feel about the situation. But then it sounds like I'm being condescending because 'Oh, I have it better than some other people, aww poor little dears that they are', which isn't the way I feel at all. I just won the life lottery, all I can do is be thankful, and feel for those who are in a situation I used to be in, and could very easily have been in for the rest of my life.

Deb:

I personally am horrified that Roe v. Wade is even being considered for overturn. The matter at hand is not whether or not you "agree" with abortion, it's about whether or not a woman who has decided to have one anyway is entitled to a safe, sterile environment.

I definitely agree with you on that one. Heck, if there's one right that women deserve above just about everything else, it's the legal right to control the fate of her own body and reproduction. I simply cannot believe the sheer volume of people who are so close-minded as to dispute the fact that women should have the right to govern their own body, and it would be a crying shame if Roe v Wade did get overturned. I know that the whole abortion debate is for another thread, but by God, if we disallow women the right to decide what is best for their own body, then we may as well make so many other atrocities against women legal: rape, not having a choice in who they marry or what job they work in, stripping them of the right to vote - pretty much every right women have ever fought for.
After all, if women can't be trusted with their own bodies, then whose property do they become? Who makes the decisions for us if we can't be trusted to make the decisions for ourselves?

Cigarettes And Suicide:

May I now extend the olive branch to you? Honestly, my intentions here are not to offend or upset people who have to live their lives a certain way, dictated by conditions that are out of their personal control. I totally agree with you, that sometimes life throws you curveballs, and you just have to make do. I'm sorry if I took things too far, but I just hate it when people try to tell me that what I'm doing with my life is wrong or stupid, just because it's not 'typical' in today's society (and let me tell you, stay-at-home parents seem to be a real anachronism in this day and age - I've even had people I thought were good friends suggest, and not in a nice way, that I must be rorting social security and getting welfare benefits that I'm not entitled to in order to survive on one income, and remain above the poverty line).

Yes, you may, and it is accepted I see where you are coming from: I realize that some feminists might put you down for your decision to be a stay-at-home Mom. I think it's fine for women to make that choice, but I do feel strongly that we MUST have some activity that is all our own, whether it be artistic, career-oriented or even volunteer work. I have also personally known some women who regretted leaving most major financial decisions to their husbands, simply because of those curveballs that they didn't see coming. It's always smarter for a woman to remain fully involved and informed, in my opinion.

Cigarettes And Suicide:

I do have a tendency to make 'blanket statements' or generalisations, but I don't apologise for those. Naturally I know that not every case is how I describe it, but I must be getting my information from somewhere, so I use what I have and keep in mind that it's not true 100% of the time. That being said, I do get tired of being attacked by other people for making generalisations, instead of taking six hours to write out EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE I know of where situations have differed from another. I don't bother, because it's too time-consuming. I always state that it's merely a generalisation, and if I forget to, I'm happy to add the disclaimer later on.

Thank you for acknowledging that - while I understand what you mean, I think that part of the purpose OF having a discussion is to sometimes show us that there ARE gray areas, and I think that both of us have accomplished this task here - we met one another halfway, and that's a beautiful thing when it happens

Cigarettes And Suicide:

Either way, I do agree with you on some of your points, and I'm sorry if I've offended you. I appreciate that you noticed my intro on GG, and let me tell you that it is quite honestly the true way I feel about the situation. But then it sounds like I'm being condescending because 'Oh, I have it better than some other people, aww poor little dears that they are', which isn't the way I feel at all. I just won the life lottery, all I can do is be thankful, and feel for those who are in a situation I used to be in, and could very easily have been in for the rest of my life.

I appreciate and accept the apology - perhaps I too am sensitive to criticism; for every woman who scorns you for your decisions is another who does the same to me. I don't condemn you for having been able to successfully raise yourself up from the ashes. I don't envy you either - our economy is such that the regular people who have been able to eek out some assets for themselves are about to get crunched.

Cigarettes And Suicide:

Heck, if there's one right that women deserve above just about everything else, it's the legal right to control the fate of her own body and reproduction. I simply cannot believe the sheer volume of people who are so close-minded as to dispute the fact that women should have the right to govern their own body, and it would be a crying shame if Roe v Wade did get overturned. I know that the whole abortion debate is for another thread, but by God, if we disallow women the right to decide what is best for their own body, then we may as well make so many other atrocities against women legal: rape, not having a choice in who they marry or what job they work in, stripping them of the right to vote - pretty much every right women have ever fought for. After all, if women can't be trusted with their own bodies, then whose property do they become? Who makes the decisions for us if we can't be trusted to make the decisions for ourselves?

Sigh...it's similar to the attitudes of those who wish to govern the sexual preferences and behaviors of others as well. I also read back a few pages and located the discussion of rape as something a woman could EVER "ask for." Trust me when I say that this is a physical impossibility: any rapist will tell you that the act is one of violence, not of sexual stimulation, and part of equal rights ARE that a woman should be able to dress, speak and behave any way she would like to WITHOUT consequence. I noticed that strippers were being judged as well: did you ever consider the very likely possibility that those women are in the profession for the quick and easy money, not because they view themselves as sex objects? (by the way, I am not aiming those questions at you, Donna - I am just asking general questions now; I am aware that those comments did not stem from you.) Sadly, that is one of the few avenues that women have to make a killing. The world hasn't changed enough yet.

sigh love this place

Deb:

I noticed that strippers were being judged as well: did you ever consider the very likely possibility that those women are in the profession for the quick and easy money, not because they view themselves as sex objects? Sadly, that is one of the few avenues that women have to make a killing. The world hasn't changed enough yet.

I think I was the one to say something like that. What you said was kind of my point. I don't think any strippers really love what they do. It's degrading and exploitive, but they feel like it's the only way they can make money. Other people view them as sex objects so I don't believe that strippers, or any women in the sex industry can be that happy.
I recently watched a show about this. A porn star was explaining how she hated what she had to do and that it felt like a bit of her soul was being taken from her every time she participated in porn, but she made so much money that she didn't want to quit. She had a daughter to provide for so she did what she felt she had too. It's sad to me that she felt she had no other option.

Cigarettes And Suicide:
I think your post actually made me a little bit dumber.
Oh well, lets agree to disagree with each other.
personally, If the country I lived in would be so wrong, I would try to change it for the sake of my children, instead of taking it out on other women. Calling them bad mothers because they can let the man stay at home just doesnt swing with me. But thats just me...

Before you swing you big prejudice axe thinking that no men can have paternityleave, google it!

Debs and Donna -- you ladies are both awesome. This is a difficult discussion, and opinions and emotions can run high when discussing something so personal, especially when you are so passionate about it. I applaud both of you for not only being wonderful women, but wonderful mothers as well.

Moving on to the subject at hand:

Does anyone else remember the highly-publicized case a few years ago, it was a woman who was raped, and the rapist and his lawyer tried to turn it around because the woman had begged him to use a condom? I can't remember all the details, but that was about the lowest I can ever imagine women's rights being degraded in my lifetime. (Yes, I realize we've suffered worse horrors than this throughout time, but I'm talking about in the last 25 years or so, and in America where "equal rights" is law.) The rapist's lawyer tried to make it out as if she were agreeing to have sex with the rapist because she had offered him the condom. I just remember feeling physically ill over this, the woman did not ask to be raped, and she knew she had no way to get out of it; asking the rapist to at least use protection in no way, shape, or form equals the woman saying, "Yes, I want you to have sex with me."

A woman never asks to be raped. No matter how she is dressed, no matter if she works in a sex industry, no means no.

Deb:

I noticed that strippers were being judged as well: did you ever consider the very likely possibility that those women are in the profession for the quick and easy money, not because they view themselves as sex objects?

I was also involved in the conversation about strippers. I'm fully aware that the main reason for stripping is money, but there are in fact many women these days who participate in things like amateur strip club nights and girls gone wild, and claim it in the name of liberation and feminism. To which I respond:

A)This doesn't help the feminism cause. It's just makes it so that women are judged even more on their appearance and their worth in sex appeal and less on what they bring to the table.
B) There is such a big difference between being sexy and sexuality. Being sexy is entirely judged by another's opinion. When you are a sex object for someone else, you are just appearing sexy for them.It doesn't particularly have anything to do with your own sexuality. I think sexuality is something so much more personal.

Quote

Sadly, that is one of the few avenues that women have to make a killing. The world hasn't changed enough yet.

Women still have to appear sexy to make a killing even when they aren't in the sex industry. I brought up the example of Katie Couric earlier. She makes tons more money than a lot of men that do her job. Yet why is it when she is so beautiful, when no one is lusting after her male counterparts in the business?

Mindfuck:

I actually get a feeling that a lot of men are sort of... scared of feminists, if that makes sense. Only because of things one hears in the media, and beat-up stories about radical feminists who apparently go around having a go at all men. I think feminism is quite misunderstood, and it's unfortunate.

Agreed. What I wish people would understand though, is that feminism is a political view, just like any other. A man could even be a feminist. I mean, just because he is a man doesn't mean he couldn't agree with feminist opinions like equality, just like the a person who is white can agree with equality for all races.

What I wish more people would understand is that there are radicals about every issue. Radical PETA members, eco-terrorists,people who blow up abortion clinics, radical christian fanatics who stand outside gay bars with signs that say"adam and eve not adam and steve"radical muslims who terrorize in the name of their religion. But for every issue, these kind of people are few and far between. Most are just normal people with their views about all these issues who express them when it's time to vote or when in a discussion with a friend. Feminism is the same.

Heybaberiba:

Cigarettes And Suicide:
I think your post actually made me a little bit dumber.

Was that really necessary? Especially since everyone else involved had already talked it over and had come to an accord?

Heybaberiba:

Before you swing you big prejudice axe thinking that no men can have paternityleave, google it!

Donna had already pointed it out that she was talking about Australia, where she lives and therefore where she is affected by the lack of paternity leave. While I think it's amazing that your country has equal leave, most countries don't. Men get a bare minimum if any. It's not like we can all pack up and move to Sweden to have our kids. We have to make do with what our laws provide.

The olive branch was extended and accepted. Let's please go back to the subject at hand.

I think it's terrible that most of the best paying jobs for women are sexual in nature, and that those jobs go somewhat hand-in-hand with the idea that since the women aren't educated, they have to use their sex appeal to get a job. I was listening to a radio show the other day and they were playing a game called "Are You Smarter Than A Winghouse Girl?" (The Winghouse is similar to a Hooters, women who work there are usually ample-chested and wear small tight shirts and tiny shorts) and it was just a perpetuation of the "dumb blonde" stereotype. I couldn't even listen to it.

Heybaberiba:

Cigarettes And Suicide:
I think your post actually made me a little bit dumber.
Oh well, lets agree to disagree with each other.
personally, If the country I lived in would be so wrong, I would try to change it for the sake of my children, instead of taking it out on other women. Calling them bad mothers because they can let the man stay at home just doesnt swing with me. But thats just me...

Before you swing you big prejudice axe thinking that no men can have paternityleave, google it!

*Sigh* I never said a woman who let a man stay at home to raise children was a bad mother. I said that if one of you (I honestly don't care which one, mum, dad, it's all the same) can afford to stay at home and look after the kids, then that's a far preferable option to dumping them in daycare and going back to work. I was saying that you'd both be bad parents if one of you could afford to stay at home, but chose not to for the sake of financial gain, when your kids should be the foremost priority in your minds. If you can't afford it, then whatever - but absolutely NOWHERE in any of my posts did I say that a woman was a bad mother if she went to work while her husband stayed at home to care for the kids.
Your country's legislation on maternity and paternity leave sounds awesome - Australian women are legally entitled to 12 months' unpaid leave, providing they have worked in the same job for a certain period of time (some places are as lax as 12 months, others mandate that you aren't entitled to maternity leave until you've worked in the same place for up to three years). I think that law is absolute bull, and it's come under review lately, but moron taxpayers had a big cry about being asked to fund paid maternity leave, so it got shelved (small businesses won't pay for maternity leave out of their own pockets because it could sink them, fair enough - but people should stop being so selfish as to refuse to help fund the next generation of doctors, lawyers, employees and politicians). I also never said that men couldn't have paternity leave - I said that WHERE I LIVE, IN AUSTRALIA, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AND THERE SHOULD BE. Men can be just as good at parenting as women. If you think that I said otherwise, you might want to get your eyes checked.

Anyway, we're done with the b.s now.

Deb, thanks for accepting my apology. I definitely get where you're coming from with everything you said. As far as we've come to win the rights we deserve, we still have a long way to go when it comes to matters of sex. The stereotype of either being a mother figure, or a whore, is still ridiculously prevalent in society - whereas men can either screw around or not, nobody really cares what they do with their genitalia.
The thing that gets me, is that someone like my husband, who has very little education and no real qualifications, can make quite good money in any old labouring job, but a woman with the same circumstance is relegated to menial jobs like working as a shop assistant on minimum wage, or becoming a cleaner. If she wants to make the big money, but dropped out of school or something, her only real choice is to enter the sex industry - either being an 'escort', participating in porn, or working long nights as a 'dancer'.
Of course if a woman is strong enough to handle manual labour, she could go into a labouring job like the boys, but even then those women are considered by their mostly male colleagues as either 'one of the boys' (if they're not petite and attractive), or the workplace dump (ie, everybody tries to dump their load in her). It's really unfair.