In areas such as medicine, more women are graduating than men. This is one of the toughest courses to get into and requires a great deal of hard work over many years to succeed in. Why do we see so many women doing so well in this area but less in right wing political parties or corporate board rooms? Perhaps because more women are attracted to this line of work.
If women can succeed in this most demanding of occupations, they certainly have the capacity to succeed in politics. Perhaps, just like driving trucks or fixing toilets, this is simply not an area that many women want to succeed in.

Of course men and women are not equal!

That’s why …

- men rape women, but women don’t rape men (at least 99% of the time)

- at least 80% of crime worldwide is committed by men

- women represent 40% of the world’s labour force and 50% of the world’s population but hold just 1% of the world’s wealth

- women earn about 60 cents in every dollar that men do – up or down, depending on the country

- at least 90% of the world’s weaponry is accessed, owned and controlled by men

- the people who claim that gender equality doesn’t really matter, because men and women are inherently different and have different gifts to offer the world, are usually men.

A highly qualified female Liberal MP who should have been in Abbott's Ministry is The Hon Dr Sharman Stone MP

Why was Dr Stone left out of the new Ministry?

•Elected to the House of Reps 1996, 1998, 2001, 2004, 2007, 2010 and 2013.

Her past Ministerial appointments include:

•Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the Environment and Heritage from 21.10.98 to 26.10.04.

•Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance and Administration from 26.10.04 to 27.1.06.

•Minister for Workforce Participation from 27.1.06 to 3.12.07.

see http://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Parliamentarian?MPID=EM6#biography

Pete

Rhysjones "<In areas such as medicine, more women are graduating than men. ..Why do we see so many women doing so well in this area but less in right wing political parties or corporate board rooms? Perhaps because more women are attracted to this line of work."

Women have fought long and hard to break into the formerly male dominated medical profession, and are now leading their field in many areas. But it has not been achieved without years of bullying and harassment of women by men in many cases...I have seen it many times in health facilities over the years.

They have at least been given the chance in medicine, but not so for politics.
How can women get 'experience' in the top political jobs if they are never given the chance?

Abbott placates his critics again by saying there are 'fine women knocking at the doors of politics" , so they must be out there. Big of him.

You can't tell me they couldn't find even ONE more woman to add to the front bench from the whole Colition party?
Yeah right...

Killarney, I love your work :)

Look we've already established that sexual equality is factually, rationally and ethically false.

It's factually false because it's not true that men and women are factually equal, and not even the equalitarians are claiming they are.

It's rationally false because there's no reason why the sexes should, and there's no way they could, be treated as equal as a matter of value, when they're not factually equal. (All it means is that you'll be inappropriately treating unequal persons *as if* they were equal, when they aren't. Of course if they really were equal, no law would be necessary to force people to treat them as if they are: it would never occur to anyone to treat them otherwise.)

It's ethically false because any attempt to enforce these beliefs rests on using aggression - "policy" - to force everyone else into obedience. So it creates two unequal classes thus contradicting itself at the same time as it claims to be a doctrine of liberation and equality!

The equalitarians, in persisting with their yarble-yarp of ignoring these categorical disproofs of their confused belief system, are either stupid or dishonest. There's no other logical possibility.

The shallow-brained hypocrisy of an equalitarian urging someone to be employed merely because she's got a vagina just defies belief.

Gender can be left out of this altogether. No two people are equal in their 'giftedness' or in ability, character etc. We are all influenced and molded by our upbringing and prevailing social norms. That is not to say there are not some inherent differences between men and women. It would be impossible to say how much is 'biology' and how much is learned with any sense of certainty. Clearly both have an influence.

It would be a poorer society that limited options purely on the basis of gender, sexuality, race, religion and which dictated people must fall rigidly into specific roles as defined by others.

It's about respect and dignity and having access to opportunities while at the same time not expecting people's collective decisions have to ultimately prove some sort of measure of 'equal'.

The best environments foster a variety of options and values people at all levels of society without discrimination.

People usually sort themselves out. As a young adult I was influenced by a society where woman were encouraged to be ambitious and break the glass ceiling. I pursued that mindset for a while but never felt quite comfortable. It was not until I had children, staying at home that I was content with simpler things. Raising my kids, tending a garden, growing things, trying a small business, getting involved in some cause or another. Sorry to get all philosophical but ambition is for me a bit of an empty vessel without a sense of purpose and what is if for. Is there a higher purpose. For others ambition and career are important and my choices nor yours should attempt to dicate what is right for others.

It is a lucky person that can find their own way and work out what is right for them. Even sacrifice or compromise can unexpectedly bring its own reward.