Ringtail ! good post, believe it or not, because you ILLUSTRATE exactly my point about a much more positive approach by our child bearing better halves to managing their lives than the attempt to fit into the regular work-a-day grind that men and single or childless women tend to see as the holy grail of personal fulfillment.

I am not against equal opportunity, lets get that straight. I AM against 'stupid' equal opportunity, i.e. putting female police in charge of male offenders who are able to take their guns and blow away 4 people. I'm against putting females on the front line of either police blockades against protestors, or on the front line of combat operations where hand to hand combat is a strong likelihood.
That is purely pragmatic, and recognizes that we guys are stronger than you gals. Its the way it is moit.

Now, for the biological reasons already discussed, I totally support YOUR approach, because it gives WAY more fulfillment than being limited to what some 'boss' thinks ur worthy of, it avoids work place politics, it gives you freedom to expand and grow as much as your energy and inclination allows, AND..... gives you the time to manage children effectively ! Now.. what is not to love about THAT ? That is where I'd like to see ALL women who have families. i.e. HAPPY :)

Anyone who tells me I should be happy travelling in traffic snarls, or crowded trains for 2 hours a day just to get to a job where I face all kinds of constraints on my creativity and drive is in need of professional help I reckon. As it is, I am self employed, live on the edge of melbourne, on a large block surrounded by trees, next to a golf course yippeee....

Tim, I see the age of miracles is not ended, you made a 'short' post and it had no links :)

Well said, Timkins and Boaz_David.

Of course, we will inevitabaly attract meanspiritedly vicious epithets from the likes of Ringtail (who will earnestly tell you how ‘compassionate’ they are)---but that’s their predictable style because they can offer no rational counterpoint.

But it is Penekiko with whom we need to take most serious issue. His/her statement that “Even if what the Havard man says is true, he shouldn't have said it” is a frightening exhibition of the pure “Nazism” that so characterises much of the feminist movement.

I am quite shocked that such a dictatorial willingness to suppress the truth is so blatantly exhibited and yet not a word of dissent.

In Penekiko’s words do we see the fundamental reason why rampant gender feminism is finally proving to be the social disaster that it really is.

Leslie Cannold’s piece is riddled with disingenuities, delusions and flat-out falsehoods. Because these are critically important social issues, and my focus is the relentless destruction of Australia’s social well-being, I have taken the time to extensively analyse and respond to most of the points Cannold makes. Due to the 350-word limit on this forum, that work is posted at http://www.oz-aware.com/feminism1.htm

Behold, the Messenger has returned to spread wisdom among us. Do not debate "St Peter", for His message is that of Ultimate Truth, as passed down to him from the Ancients.

Call Him for what He is and Ye will be struck down by a bolt of censorship.

Hallelujah, He is Risen!

Praise the Lord and pass the patriarchal bulldust!

For a real laugh follow St Peter's link.

Boaz,

I try to look at an issue from different aspects before I make a judgement, so I include links to some articles I have referenced.

Unfortunately this method of looking at issues has resulted in myself eventually forming an objective judgement that feminism is one of the most fraudulent, hypercritical, corrupted and damaging social systems ever seen in western society in recent decades.

In relation to Larry Summers, the author presents a distant and biased viewpoint, but a more localised and objective view is contained in an article titled “Dear Ellen”; or,
Sexual Correctness at Harvard” by Ruth R.Wisse (who is a female professor currently at Harvard)
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/production/files/wisseadvance.html

This article contains the following:-

“As for an ideal of equality based on equal outcomes, it not only sabotages equal opportunity but engenders a system that corrupts everyone who participates in it.”

“But that is not the end of the corruption. The women’s caucus at Harvard, which boasts of representing 90 percent of the senior female faculty, claims to be fighting for “diversity.” There are currently 86 tenured female professors in the arts and sciences at Harvard; there may be a tenth that number of tenured Republicans, male or female. By substituting sexual for intellectual or any other kind of diversity, feminist watchdogs have already done their bit to help create Harvard’s notoriously monolithic faculty.”

“As it happens, a friend of mine who is a member of this same group recently attended her 25th reunion at one of the “seven sister” colleges…. But instead of flaunting their achievements, many of these classmates resentfully took the occasion of their reunion to rail at the school’s administration and faculty for not having encouraged them to aim for husbands and families while they still could. “Why weren’t we told?”

So, what exactly is being complaining about? Prof Summers, women's reproductive systems, the fraudulent nature of feminism, the hours involved in science and technology work etc

It is uncertain, but it is very noticeable that so much maligning of the male gender goes uncommented on.

Is this maligning of the male gender acceptable to feminists?

"Only when the playing field is truly level - both at home and at work - "

But inevitably we revert to an unbalanced discussion of the rights of women only.

Sadly, there's no male "Equal Childcare Opportunity" funding, akin to female "Equal Employment Opportunity" funding. Without official encouragement, fathers are increasingly abandoning pay increases/promotions to spend more time at home.

An Affirmative Action program giving fathers preferential options to stay home would allow careers for more mothers.

"Women do give up and accept life on the Mummy-track, a lack of real options to balance work and family is the cause."

The same essential imbalance quashes Dad's desire to spend more time with family. Father's conundrum is "life on the Lost-Family-track". Dad's financial-provider role steals his desires just as Mum's child-nurturer role steals hers. Dad's overtime means Mum must care for the kids.

BOTH parents should be encouraged to pursue their "non-traditional" roles: freeing Dad for family, freeing Mum for a career. Women can better advance careers when men are afforded time with families.

This is particularly true in divorces, where maternal demands are magnified. By acknowledging in law the majority who want shared equal care after divorce, we would free time for more women to advance careers, and also satisfy men's desires to be with their children.

Some divorced mothers resist shared care because they fear reduction of their nurturing role. Yet women could more easily pursue financial independence, which is also enormously desirable and empowering for most women.

The divorce reality, now, is mothers financially trapped for years until their children reach 18, whereupon they are finally "freed", but without job skills.

Indeed, incentives to employers to take on time-share employees are needed.

It is true; we need equality both at home and work for women to excel in the workplace.

I have, however, seen few women with gnawed stumps. Empowering women also means allowing them to stay at home if they desire. It's not logical to claim US PhD and Science students and academics as indicative of the general Australian population.

Boaz_David,

Society would function much better if police and army ranks drew only on female recruitments. Evidence: God Emperor of Dune, by Frank Herbert. Yes it is obviously a science fiction novel, but keep in mind that fiction is often an effective way to convey philosophy and sociology.

"Leto II founded the Fish Speakers to enforce his rule over
everything that exists anywhereuniverse. He found the existing military organisations, the Fremen and the Sardaukar, unsuitable to his needs. Leto believed that male dominated military organisations were essentially predatory and would turn on the civilian population in the absence of an external enemy. He also needed a reliable religious organization to enforce what came to be known as Leto's peace to ensure the unfolding of the Golden Path. Leto trained them to be fanatical, disciplined, and extremely effective soldiers and police. Leto used the Fish Speakers in his breeding program, taking advantage of their speed and strength."

from http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/F/Fi/Fish_Speakers.htm

The Havard man said more or less, "women aren't as intelligent as men." Well who in this forum believes that? Now, if you were VC of a prestigious institution, would you say what he said?