The all seeing omnipotent voice of reason,
I don’t think the situation is all that humorous. ABS estimates are that by about 2026, the number of people in single person households will increase by 2 million. But to meet this demand, almost 2,000 new houses will need to be built each and every week for the next 20yrs, (but for minimal increase in population). Also by about 2050, it is estimated that almost all adults in Australia will be living in single person households.

So people will go to work, then go home to live by themselves in a little box. This will satisfy a need for people to live a free and independent life, and be able to concentrate fully on their jobs, free from yucky husbands, yucky wives, and yucky children.

well, O.K. , I admit I find humour in the strangest of things...
keeps me sane but drives everyone else nuts.
The concept that a population trend or social trend is static is only any use if you want to manipulate the statistics.
For example, after a war there is a constricted population where theres not the numbers of fighting age men.
similarly, theres "baby booms". One could take either of these population anomalies and say pretty well whatever you want.
Also theres social bahavioural trends, where children rebel against their parents. We all know about kids doing this and that,
but if the parents do this and that, the kids rebel by going to uni or church etc. anything to have an identity different to the parents.
I wouldnt suggest that this is always so.
I do live the life you talk about...alone, scurrying back to my little hidey hole each day and avoiding people. It has its ups and downs, but ultimately its a free world.
I guess the other reason I cant take it that seriously is that I've been a single parent to my two sons in the past, and all the talk is only focussed on how tough MOTHERHOOD versus career is.
Surely the question should be quality parenting.
If you have kids younger than about five, a parent needs to be there for them...and in the majority of cases I'm sure a parent would choose to be.
On an unrelated note, do you see that being the biggest issue we will have in 20 years time?

"Also by about 2050, it is estimated that almost all adults in Australia will be living in single person households."

What nonsense! Where did this ridiculous statistic come from - surely not the ABS?

And in any case, what does it have to do with the article?

The all seeing omnipotent voice of reason,
Statistics become very important. A considerable range of government legislation and even taxation is based on statistics. Even statistics relating to household type become important, for town planning purposes alone.

However you say that you were a single parent, and now you live in a single person household. That is very common.

Also the article talks about parenting, but leaves out the father. That is very common too.

There have been quite a few articles in OLO on motherhood, with very few articles on fatherhood. Maybe the editors should suggest to writers that they include fathers when writing articles about parenting, and if they want to malign fathers, then they should malign mothers too. That would be fair, and help to create balance.

The author seems to be suggesting that a woman can’t be a mother and have a job at the same time. Well, if the mother was a single parent, then it would be difficult. If there were 2 parents, then the task of earning family income and raising children would become much less difficult, and further more, it might even lessen the number of single person households, and lessen the need to for 2,000 new houses to be built each week for the next 20 yrs.

Mahatma Duck,
You have called other posters many names in the past, and in fact, you have devoted entire posts to maligning other posters.

You are “nonsense”
You are “ridiculous”
Your post has nothing “to do with the article”

Yup - I thought that "statistic" was a fabrication.

Further, I didn't call anybody any names - my comment was clearly directed towards a spurious and irrelevant argument that relied on a fictitious statistic.

But don't let the facts get in the way of a tedious misogynist rant.

mahatma duck,
You are a “fabrication.”
You call other posters “names”
You are “spurious”
You are “irrelevant”
You are “fictitious”
You are “tedious”
You are “misogynist”
You “rant.”

In other forums you have called various people quite a variety of names, and in one particular forum, you were asked a number of questions, but you never answered those questions, but continued to call other people various names.

I see no great necessity to provide you with anything, because so far as I am concerned, you just like to call other people various names, (and with the most minimal level of explanation or substantiation given).

But you would be free to read through all the links I have previously provided in earlier forums, and you might gain some information.

BTW. In the future, could I call you Morganzola, who used to be another poster, who had a very similar style to yours (ie identical).