The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Workplace satisfaction begins in the home > Comments

Workplace satisfaction begins in the home : Comments

By Daniel Donahoo, published 28/7/2005

Daniel Donahoo argues that society needs to re-evaluate the value of paid and unpaid work.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
Yet another male maligning article from Daniel. I think he would be right at home in the Sex Discrimination Commission.

The paper “Striking the Balance” was written by 7 authors who were appointed by the Sex Discrimination Commission, but all of these authors were female, and it seems that the Sex Discrimination Commission has not yet learnt to strike much of a gender balance within it’s own department. "Do As I Say", should become their motto.

Their paper is typically selective, and mostly presented from a feminist viewpoint. It highlights that men earn more, but overlooks the fact that the money they earn is not necessarily spent by themselves, as women spend about 70% of money that is spent.

It highlights that women spend more time on housework, but does not suggest that they should be thinking of ways to reduce housework, and in fact much housework could be unnecessary.

It mentions the fact that women spend more time with children, but overlooks the fact that about 60% of custodial mothers do not want the non-custodial father to spend more time with his children (and there are now a lot of non-custodial fathers).

The list could go on, but if someone is pro-female, that is no guarantee that they are pro-male as well, and the Sex Discrimination Commission would know all about that.
Posted by Timkins, Thursday, 28 July 2005 11:46:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
How on earth was Daniel's article "male-maligning"? It was outlining that in general domestic duties are undervalued and dismissed by all sectors of society, women, men, children, youth.... everyone.

Daniel, domestic duties do make our lives nicer- clean clothes, cooked meals etc... but ugh! If I could outsource these duties... *wishful thinking* :)
Posted by Laurie, Thursday, 28 July 2005 11:52:20 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Timkins!

How's it going mate? Good to see you still goin' strong. Please don't worry. Men are not turning into feminists. Daniel certainly isn't jumping on the 'feminist' bandwagon or maligning men as you put it. As Daniel states "...using a confrontational approach to move men along won't be productive". Doesn't look like man bashing to me.

We all need to think about "house work" "domestic duties", etc and look at the value or role they play in our lives. Should these be accredited a monetry value? Shouldn't we be looking at why we need do house work? Lots of men live alone or without a wife or female partner. Lots of men who have a female partner/ wife do their fair share (or maybe even more) of the chores. Gay households also face the issue of the dreaded housework. Daniel's spot on when he says that house hold duties and the like should be taught from an early age, to both boys and girls for that matter. I still hear many stories of share "house mates from hell", who can't seem to get the drift of getting off their butts and keeping the place reasonably clean enough to manitain a generally healthy ( physically and mentally) environment for all.

Thats what I got from the article anyway. Please read the whole article Timkins. Perhaps you would then agree with some of the points raised and be able to debate the points you don't , a bit more constructively. Cheers!

P.S I have often wondered if you are taking the piss.... ;)
Posted by silent minority, Thursday, 28 July 2005 12:55:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Silent Minority,
Who says men need to be “moved along”. Some men maybe, but not men in general, and those types of generalised, negative statements made about men are the most typical from Daniel. If he has ever made a positive statement about men in general, then you can find it.

But the inquiry being run by the Sex Discrimination Commission is typically sexist of that Commission. All the authors of the discussion paper are female, and from what I have heard, all the members of the committee who will review submissions to the inquiry are also female. So I doubt very much whether it would be worthwhile for a male to make a submission, unless they wanted to add to all the negative comments made about the male gender that are contained within the discussion paper, or add to all the sexists and male vilifying comments made by Pru Goward herself. From past history, I think only those types of comments will be accepted by the Sex Discrimination Commission.

PS. I have carried out many different tasks in the past, from programming computers to building a house once, but I have never done anything easier than housework.
Posted by Timkins, Thursday, 28 July 2005 2:07:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh Timkins.

Forgive me, but what relevance does your comment "It highlights that men earn more, but overlooks the fact that the money they earn is not necessarily spent by themselves, as women spend about 70% of money that is spent" have to a report about work-life balance?...

About 80 percent of the people I see spending money in the supermarket are women - that could be contributing to the figures...
I know, I know... you did the grocery shopping in your house...

By the way, I don't think many people complain that housework is hard... it's the fact it has to be carried out so bloody often - especially when some occupants refuse to help with it...
Posted by Tracy, Thursday, 28 July 2005 6:49:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
On discussion and debate with regards to the unpaid housewife who's day normally finishes at 9.30pm, if she is lucky, comes to $70 000+.

We will see a continued debate as our illustrious Government believe that women need to go out and work when a child turns six years old.

The women in Australian society is already realised as a multiskilled, underpaid citizen both at home and at the workplace.

Women need to stand up to say that we are balancing enough in life.

Latest statistics is that we are lucky to have 15 minutes a day to think about ourselves outside our responsibilities.

And guys if you think we are just being cranky people it is because we don't get time to ourselves.

Part of those responsibilities is also ensuring that resources are purchased so that all the inhabitants in the household are able to have continuity to maintain their daily lives.

Until men can have babies, I believe we will continue to see a high content of the female species standing in line at the shopping centres.

And as one of the females standing in a line, I particularly don't find it a joyous experience everytime.
Posted by suebdoo2, Thursday, 28 July 2005 10:03:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well all I can add to the housework debate is that I do not do enough, never have, and I have decided to blame my mother. No, I am serious, and I still see the problem germinating in today`s society. Young guys are feted and fawned upon by their mothers, constantly. Daughters however still get lined up to do all the girl type things. My mother to this day (I am 45) is still aghast if she is staying over and sees me get up in the morning and iron my clothes for work! She moved to live close to my sister, telling my wife and I that it was so my sister could look after her in her old age. I did not even crack a mention (thank god!)She is still wondering when my wife is going to stop persuing her various whims (you know running her seven day a week business etc)and settle down and look after me! We do not even have an ethnic background that might come preloaded with these traits.I had to do things around the house to earn my pocket money, moved put of home when I was 16 (moved back a couple of times too). Of course me and my mates only did the dishes once a week, my wife still does not understand the concept. And yet I am still crap at housework frequency but thorough when I do get around to it. So what chance do government think tanks have against the force of all those mothers out there?
Posted by fred, Thursday, 28 July 2005 11:15:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Also Timkins,

Your comment, “Who says men need to be ‘moved along’. Some men maybe, but not men in general, and those types of generalised, negative statements made about men are the most typical from Daniel” is a little naïve. The comment that men need to be 'moved along’ refers to findings in the Sex Discrimination Commission discussion paper, Striking the Balance - not the author's own study.

The author’s quote, “The statistics showing women still do most of the housework, even when they work full time and have a male partner who is unemployed, should put men to shame” referred to the discussion paper findings.

Would a discussion paper written about men’s role in fathering, written by seven men, bear much weight to you? Or would you also claim that paper was biased to on the basis of its authors’ gender?

Additionally, you may like to read the discussion paper, or just hit the website if you don’t have the time (http://www.hreoc.gov.au/sex_discrimination/strikingbalance/). There you’ll find the description of the discussion paper includes the following statements:

“Women continue to bear the greater burden of unpaid work at the same time as more men are expressing the desire for greater involvement with their children. There is also growing community awareness of the importance for children of active fathering and a concern about the future burden of caring given Australia's ageing population.”

and

“However, we will not be successful unless we ensure men and women have the same opportunities to engage in paid work and unpaid caring work. While we have come a long way in opening up opportunities for women in paid work, we have not had the same success in allowing men and women to care equally for their families. It is this second half of the equality revolution that this project aims to accelerate.”

To me, that would indicate the authors are quite concerned about the caring role of the male in our society, not ‘male-maligning’, as you call it.
Posted by Tracy, Friday, 29 July 2005 8:18:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There have been a number of people who have tried to make a career by saying male = bad, female = good, and in their ongoing attempts to malign males as much as possible, (and to portray females as being perpetually victimised), professional feminists have said “All males are rapists” or “All males are liars” etc, and now they are saying that “Men earn more than women”.

What they ignore is that men earn more, because of the type of work they often do, and other factors such as men retire at an average age of 58, while women retire at an average age of 41. And men will normally hand over the money they earn to wives or ex-wives etc, which is why 70% of household expenditure is spent by women. Much easier to spend money than earn money, and I think women have had the better of the deal.

As a part of male = bad, female = good, feminists will also try to portray men as being slovenly, lazy, incapable with children etc. They overlook any women who are like this also, and overlook the number of cleaners, chefs, paediatricians etc who are often male.

As far as housework goes, it is extremely easy physically, and if housework cannot be reduced down to a couple of hrs per day, then there is something wrong in the design or organisation of that house.

There are also many, many jobs that are much more exhausting and tedious than housework (eg. no one has ever lived until they have done shiftwork in a factory and worked at 3 am in the morning), but paid work now involves such things as job descriptions, written task procedures, stringent safety requirements, training requirements, EBA’s, work reviews etc. None of these things are required for unpaid work such as housework, which means that paid work and unpaid work cannot be adequately compared.

The all female, pro-feminist Sex Discrimination Commission did not mention any of this in their paper that was written by the 7 female authors. Nor did Daniel in his article.
Posted by Timkins, Friday, 29 July 2005 11:51:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Timkins, you seem to make a habit of saying "female=bad, male=good"!

There are surely no such clear-cut divisions. Housework is difficult not through the complexity or physical difficulty of any specific tasks, but through the mind-numbing repetitiveness and frustration of doing the same task over and over and seeing that work undone in five minutes flat!

Is it really so terrible that "women spend 70% of the household budget"? Well, in a way, sure. Because they are clearly doing a disproportionate amount of the grocery shopping! But is this in any way a measure of power or influence or the state of a family's relationships with each other, who buys the fruit and veggies each week?!
Posted by Laurie, Friday, 29 July 2005 12:29:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Laurie,
Much of what feminism is currently about, is trying to get more money for females, even if they are not earning that money.

So in feminist philosophy, a female hairdresser should be paid the same as a male engineer, or a mother doing child minding should be paid by government (or some other person, as feminists seldom care where money comes from) the same amount as a male doctor.

Daniel mentions this type of feminist thinking when he says that housework should have a 6 figure salary, (ie. “Neat graphs demonstrate that stay-at-home mums should be earning six-figure salaries.”) This is complete crap, as there are minimal skills and training required to put clothes into a washing machine and press a button, or even hang those clothes on a clothes line.

Housework is not boring, as it should only take a couple of hours per day if properly organised, (and this comes from someone who does all housework, and has also been involved in a number of productivity groups within the paid workforce). Once housework chores are done, the person has the rest of the day free. People dream of this type of lifestyle for their retirement.

If I had more than 350 words, I could also highlight much of the feminist hypocrisy that is contained within the Sex Discrimination Commission’s paper, but the paper ultimately defines males as those who “have to improve their ways” (ie males presently bad, females presently good), but the Sex Discrimination Commission having 7 authors that are all female says enough (ie 7 female authors = good).

NB. If someone does not like standing in line at supermarkets, then go first thing when they open. Have a properly prepared shopping list, and do not browse. Just buy what is required, and they will be out of there in 30 minutes. It is this type of organisation that reduces housework to a couple of hours per day maximum
Posted by Timkins, Friday, 29 July 2005 2:26:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Tracy, perhaps the question you should be asking yourself is

"Would a discussion paper written about womens’s role in parenting, written by seven men, bear much weight to you? Or would you also claim that paper was biased to on the basis of its authors’ gender?"

Add to that one of the principles having a reputation for denigrating women and mothers. From your perspective you could assume that Timkins lead up the project (no personal reflection on Timkins here rather trying to set the scene). You might also add a history ofr studies which doctored the books so to speak, ignoring some categories of work and other techiques almost guaranteed to produce the required result.

Each household will be different, there are men who don't pull their weight. Likewise there are women who don't do a fair share.

Each case on it's merits and an equal opportunities commissioner who was conspicuous for caring about truth and we might move past some of this stuff.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Friday, 29 July 2005 4:25:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Timkins,

Your comment, feminists think "...a female hairdresser should be paid the same as a male engineer, or a mother doing child minding should be paid by government (or some other person, as feminists seldom care where money comes from) the same amount as a male doctor" is, in your words, complete crap.

"...there are minimal skills and training required to put clothes into a washing machine and press a button, or even hang those clothes on a clothes line."

True. Not highly skilled work. Even men can do that [sorry, couldn't resist ;) ]... but figures are dependent on type of work undertaken, frequency etc.

For example, in managing a household with two pre-school age children (two and three.5), work begins at 4.30am some days when my youngest wakes, and doesn't end until... well... my eldest is still up now, though in bed. Some days I get breaks long enough to sit at the computer for 10 minutes at a time.

Then I'm up to them a minimum of three times a night. Washing (clothes and dishes, no dishwasher, cloth nappies), cooking, shopping, cleaning, balancing budgets, personal care (toilet training, helping them dress, bathing), education (yes, I'm teaching them), outdoor play, excursions... 365 days, thankyou - no days off or weekends.

Find me a parallel in the paid work sector. Have you stayed home to raise young children?

"Housework...should only take a couple of hours per day if properly organised"

Pah.

"Once housework chores are done, the person has the rest of the day free."

What - the four hours I'm allowed to sleep?

"If someone does not like standing in line at supermarkets, then go first thing when they open... they will be out of there in 30 minutes.. this type of organisation ... reduces housework to a couple of hours per day maximum"

Dream on, Timkins. There are many varying levels of household management undertaken by people at many varying stages of their lives.

R0bert,

Fair call if that's your assessment of this Commission, and these authors. I disagree. But I appreciate the way you put it.
Posted by Tracy, Friday, 29 July 2005 8:12:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Daniel

Thanks for your article. I always enjoy your writing - always good "think tank" stuff. I like your writing style. I do not have to agree with what you say to enjoy the debate that you are trying to generate.

The above summation of your article is quite concrete for me. I think that the thrust of your article is about teaching "team playing" in the home - which later on in life will assist in team work - regardless of the work environment. Is that too simplistic?

The family principles that we were taught as kids have held me in good stead all of my life. We didn't get paid pocket money for doing jobs around the home. We did our jobs because that was part of being our family. I must admit though - if my brother could get out of anything, he would! I, on the other hand, loved doing things for Mum and Dad. I used to try and surprise them with little jobs - such as weeding the garden - even though they just about had a heart attack when they found their best garden bed had been de-nuded of the plants (I thought they were weeds!).

I cannot comment on the dollar value (weekly wage) of women who have children and are stay at home mothers. I do not have children - am in no position to judge.

Our family team principles extended in to team sports for all of our pre-adult years. My brother and I were great team members and players.

Does this have anything to do with washing up and stuff? On the surface - no. My brother is a single parent with two young teenage girls (their mother died when they were babies). He has a full time job and he does all of the housework and stuff - apart from very ill Grandma who does all of the washing and ironing. I wonder what a Dad like he is worth on the dollar?

Cheers
Posted by kalweb, Friday, 29 July 2005 8:16:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Tracy, to be fair I have not read this particular study yet. Thanks for the link supplied in your earlier post.

My observation was based on my perceptions of Prue Gowards history in this kind of issue (she has made some very sexist and generalised comments about men on a number of occasions) and the techniques employed in previous studies.

These kind of reports bother me because they get misused and misrepresented. Where is Pru's report into the "Sofa Loafers" who are living off their kids? (I know that's not all single mums and that many are trying really hard). Prue seems fairly keen to tackle mens shortcomings but I've seen no attempt to deal with women doing the wrong thing.

If you are home schooling and using cloth nappies your workload is likely to be much greater than the norm. Are they choices you make or absolute necessities? It seems that whatever generalisations we are able to make there will be exceptions (another generalisation). Many of the points Timkins makes are relevant to many of us.

Jobs that are often refered to as significant items seem to be a non issue. Laundry being a classic, it really is a simple and quick (excluding cloth nappies). I do the grocery shop when my son is not with me and in the evening when the supermarket is quiet. I do the ironing in the lounge so I can watch a movie or something at the same time. I enjoy gardening so garden maintenance is more pleasure than pain and I'm setting gardens up to be low maintenance. I mostly use frozen vegs and try and manage meals so that they are healthy and quick to prepare (lots of stir fries etc). I don't have a dishwasher either. I've set up an old TV in the kitchen so I can catch the news while I cook, wash dishes etc. Basically trying to find ways to make things work better.

Your circumstances are different and solutions for you will be different.

Cheers
R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Saturday, 30 July 2005 8:27:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Fighting over who does the dishes is a long standing Australian tradition"

Simple question: "why" ?

Ok, everyone knows my position on most things, its the Biblical one, and I feel that in this 'us/them' atmosphere, it might be refreshing to have a different 'outside the loop' perspective.

"Husbands love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her"

"Do for your wife, as you would have her do for you"

Translate this into the daily grind of home management/maintainace/dishwashing... what comes to my mind is "You cook, I'll wash" or vice versa.

Perhaps it has beCOME a fighting thing, because we have wandered from the foundation we began on ?

As the bumper sticker goes "Does God seem far away ? guess who moved"...

In 1956 there were 150,000 people (largest crowd EVER for any event at the MCG listening to Billy Graham. Recently, I along with 37,000 others from 800 churches shared in the visit of his son Franklin, at Telstra stadium.

Looking at the state of our society, one is tempted to see a link between the polarization of our socio/political situation and a departure from values which have proved enduring.

I never see anything resembling a 'solution' to these types of debates, nor do I see much compromise, but I do see a lot of justification of entrenched positions. it seems to me like the pendulum is never going to stop at the rest position without a hand grabbing it.

It should not surprise anyone, then, that I come to these discussions with a totally different approach.

There is nothing 'evil' or 'unjust' about complementary roles for male female in society, there can be unjust or evil manipulation of such roles, and abandonment of responsibilities, but this does not negate the values themselves. There are ways of protecting the paries to the social contract, even though they might not be doing the same type of work.
Life is really about enjoying it, and being happy. Complementary social roles is not a barrier to that worthy goal.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Saturday, 30 July 2005 10:35:50 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Excluding your religious bend BD, I do agree with your post (!). There is no real reason to have a definition of roles for gender anymore. A shared, co-operative working environment is all that should be expected. However there are still sexist men and there are still manipulative women.

I understand Timkin’s point though. When you are one who does ‘his fair share’, it is difficult to see words that generalise and don’t represent your position.

BD, just please don’t state that a woman’s place is in the home!
Posted by JustDan, Saturday, 30 July 2005 1:12:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
DD: “By not teaching children they have a role to play in the running of a household we are not instilling in them the most basic life skills.”

Absolutely.

In the home, children make much better allies than they do enemies– but I have found that you have to start involving them in domestic solutions from the moment they start tipping things all over the kitchen floor – let them help to clean it up, they love it.

My 5 all pitch in, of course there are arguments but they can all cook, wash, clean etc – the older ones shop, bank, pay bills, search real estate adds, repel door salespeople etc. Sometimes even the dinner is ready when I get home!!

Sounds too good to be true? Try it - I started very early - the young ones seem to learn more from the older ones than the parent?

Now I’m going to cop flack for this one but perhaps women are worth more than men per housework hour – how many men can multitask?

For lazy spouses? Maybe the same as young children – when they make a mess bring out the gear and show them how to clean it up, every time.

Timkins, see if you can get on the Commission.
Posted by hutlen, Saturday, 30 July 2005 1:43:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Robert,
The Sex Discrimination’s paper “Striking the Balance” is actually a background paper for the inquiry into work and family that is being conducted by the Sex Discrimination Commission. Submissions to that inquiry can be made at http://www.hreoc.gov.au/sex_discrimination/) .

However all 7 authors of the paper are female, and all the members of the committee that will undertake the actual inquiry are also female. I would think that the all female nature of the inquiry has been purposely arranged such that male vilification can be maximised by persons such as Pru Goward.

There are many things left out of the paper to make males look as culpable as possible. For example :- The paper quotes figures from the HILDA survey, but routinely ignores other figures from that same survey.

In the HILDA paper “Usual and Preferred Working Hours in Couple Households”
http://www.latrobe.edu.au/publichealth/family_studies/2005papers/Drago,Tseng,Wooden_pp.46-61_Abstract.pdf mothers where asked what were their present and preferred work hours. In each category, the mothers wanted to work considerably less hrs than their husbands. Not the same number of hours, and definitely not more.

There were other papers released from the HILDA survey on male and female satisfaction which are described in a Bettina Ardnt article:-
“Analysis of HILDA data by Yi-Ping Tseng, of the Melbourne Institute, shows wives with the highest life satisfaction in Australia are in families where either the man is the sole earner or working significantly longer hours than the woman."
http://www.smh.com.au/cgi-bin/common/popupPrintArticle.pl?path=/articles/2003/07/28/1059244559445.html

So many, if not the majority of women want the father to be the main breadwinner,(and if he didn't, then he would probably become divorced), but this has rarely been mentioned by the Sex Discrimination Commission (ie useing selective data in their paper).

However if women also want to do less unpaid work such as housework, then they should develop ways to reduce that housework, and there are innumerable ways to do that.
Posted by Timkins, Saturday, 30 July 2005 3:42:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am enjoying reading the posts here - some good sense, some fair dinkum stuff and humour. The drain of the Muslim/Islam terrorist debate etc on other threads has been just that - draining. This is a refreshing, albeit serious, matter for discussion.

RObert - thanks for your post. You are sure to give some single fathers another view of what could be a rather depressing world. Good on you!

BOAZ David - what can I say but congratulations! Your post was touching and humane. For the first time I think we can start to get to know the "real you" - without endless quotations from the Bible and the Kuran. And the absence of capitalisation to push a point was more than refreshing (whatever that is!).

Timkins - I always respect the thought that you put into your postings and I thank you for the time and trouble that you give to other posters in providing so many links for researching other ideas. Can you look back to my previous post and tell me what my brother is worth? I am not joking. His wife died when girl one was 15 months and girl two was 5 months of age (he was 40 years of age at the time). He is still single and caring for his beloved daughters.

Now hear this! You are all going to think that I am crazy. I love housework (despite my academic and nursing background! I love the feeling of being clean and making things clean around the home. I love the feeling when guests remark how "warm" our home feels. I love decorating, cooking, gardening. I make all of my own stuff and grow it when I can. Yum! The pleasure that me and my husband get cannot be summed up in dollar terms. Our home is definitely our castle. And my husband kicks in with everything.

Cheers all!
Posted by kalweb, Saturday, 30 July 2005 5:11:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Kalweb,
I have been solely looking after one child since she was the age of 2, but I certainly could not equate paid with unpaid work.

The present inquiry from the Sex Discrimination Commission is tied into feminism, money and the draconian Family Law system, and the double standards that are involved can be best read about in the Bettina Ardnt article

Eg:-"So women are hardly marching in the streets demanding their husbands work shorter hours. Hell, no. It's clear that most wives feel it is in their family's interest to keep their husband's nose to the grindstone, even if it means he misses out on time with children. And men are also accepting of this arrangement - until their marriages fall apart. For it is then the crunch comes and breadwinning dads lose out badly. That's the irony. The married men who once were rated most highly by their wives - as partners and as fathers - then have their willingness to support their families count against them. When it comes to a battle over custody, men who worked those long hours are least likely to be allowed shared care and usually end up as visiting fathers with fortnightly contact."
http://www.smh.com.au/cgi-bin/common/popupPrintArticle.pl?path=/articles/2003/07/28/1059244559445.html

So women have been pleased to have the father in the workforce, but come divorce time, they will claim up to 80% of assets, claim custody of the children, claim the various government pensions, claim child support etc, and base those claims on the fact that the father spent so much time in the workforce (which is what the mothers wanted in the first place).

The Sex Discrimination Commission is also pleased to vilify and malign males as much as possible, present selective data in their papers, have all female inquiries, and also overlook the double standards that are occurring.

If someone is having problems with housework, they could think about ways of reducing it, or if they want tips on how to reduce that housework, they could subscribe to the FLYLADDY newsletters at http://www.flylady.net/
Posted by Timkins, Saturday, 30 July 2005 6:04:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Kay... this is indeed the 'real' me :) but I'm also the 'protector/social warrior'.. hey.. I'm a guy.

Dan.. a womans place.... hmmmm well, I would not be dogmatic on it being 'the home' though their is just one verse I know which suggests it, and I think Paul had a bad hair day when he wrote it :) so I won't quote it.

Kay demonstrates wonderfully all that I would want to say on the subject. There is something very beautiful about 'complementary' roles and personally, I feel better if the 'little woman' :) is looking after inside stuff (but she doesn't have to STAY inside (sorry Kay, had to use the caps for that one :)

At the moment, I'm building a room in our factory, my wife is doing some process work, but when I get close to the end of the job, there she is, sweeping and tidying up without being asked, she helps hold this or that, and while I'm much stronger than her, she still 'carries' me at times with her incredible determination to 'get things done'.

The other side of the womans life/world I note, is how happy they and we can be, is when there is a big event. Men have things they are best at, and so do the ladies, can you imagine all of us getting in each others way, falling over each other.

Sometimes I think that in our pc gender freedom, we can be awfully alone and lost. I much prefer an accepted dichotomy of roles.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Saturday, 30 July 2005 6:11:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi R0bert,

I understand your position, and thanks for your considered response. I admire your solutions!

There's a paradox you're identifying which I'm familiar with, and one that Timkins has expressed frustration with before: that of the woman=good, man=bad attitude.

As a woman, it frustrates me too. And I'm sure I've said before, I have two little boys and every day I try to counter those negative, antagonistic messages. I'm determined my boys will grow up respectful and considerate, but feeling no less deserving of respect because they're male.

Yes, these are choices I make. I don't resent the work I do. I love it (except the nappies)! My post was to present a realistic assessment of why some believe this work is worth a six-figure salary. I don't, and wouldn't want the money. I get my kicks out of working with beautiful people, and working for the people I adore. I'm lucky. But you're right - whatever generalisations we make, there are always exceptions.

I take my boys shopping with me because it's a fantastic opportunity for practical education on consumerism. While we can take a long time, I get them to touch, feel and examine packaging, quiz them on the contents, and ask them to consider why particular advertising tactics are used. Believe it or not, I can stand in line next to the lolly counter for 10 minutes and neither of them asks for a thing. My eldest says, 'Mum, they're trying to sell me junk'. They're very savvy. He doesn't ask for me to buy him toys - what use are they when he spends so much of his days making his own, and I make the rest...

Believe me, I waste no time on cleaning spotlessly - most days I don't stop moving and the house is still a bombshell.

I like the fridge magnet my mother-in-law has: "Dull women have immaculate houses". No offence to anyone with an immaculate house. It just makes me feel better...

Cheers,
Tracy
Posted by Tracy, Saturday, 30 July 2005 7:07:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
kalweb, thanks for the kind words. I'd been a bit concerned about the most recent post - the balance between making a point and earbashing can be tricky to find sometimes.

Boaz_David, agreed that it is nice when two people are able to work together in a manner which makes a larger whole. Reinforcing and or complimenting each other. On the other hand it can be a living hell when that is not the way it goes, the man plays roadblock to a partner exploring her potential, the woman who is after a provider and he'd better provide as much as she wants etc.

I've been over this point previously with others but it is important enough I'll go there again. I think we are going through a period of transition, some parts of that transition are not working well right now. Kind of like the mess you get when you move house.

We are redefining relationships, maybe in part as a result of changed religious beliefs but possibly both are a consequence of changed needs. A shift in techology (and probably other factors) is changing some of the needs of people and we are trying to find new ways of living our lives.

Right now we have a mix of the old and transition and they do not always go well together. Sometimes the old furniture does not work well in the new house. Sometimes we dispose of old furniture and then find that what we've replaced it with is not as comfortable.

What are the core things we need to remember from the old structures and how do they apply in the new world we are building? We can't move back to the old house, how do we make the new one work for us?

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Saturday, 30 July 2005 7:16:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Funny thing about housework is that the more you do, the more you want to do, and that the less you do the less you want to do.

l, a mere male, was schooled in housework from the age of 12. All the kids did housework. Everyhing from washing dishes, to cleaning the oven, fridge, toilet, shower, bathroom, to mowing lawns and washing windows. When l moved out of home at 22 l used to automatically spend saturday mornings cleaning. Did that for a few years and then gradually stopped. Now, in my late 30s, apart from cooking and the basics (l live alone) l barely do any cleaning at all.

And you know wot... my world hasn't stopped turning. My clothes are clean enough and so is the house. Sure, l cant eat off the floors and dust has become my new best friend, but... shock horror... my quality of life and standard of living have not declined. In fact they have IMPROVED. Not wasting my time cleaning clean surfaces and instead spending this short life doing the things that really matter, like living.

How do all those people who live in 3rd world countries with their not very clean mud and grass huts manage to have a fulfilling life, which many of them do, sans the 'high' standard of westernised living?

Sometimes l suspect that home makers spend a lot of time filling out an 8 hour day with 2 hours worth of work. There is a concept in managerial economics that says the amount of time taken to do a job will expand to fill the time alloted to that task. This attitude permeates the paid workforce, so l doubt that it doesnt also dominate the unpaid workforce. It all about rationalising one's contribution.

Its rather tedious that this article comes across as a predictable smoke screen for the us/them nonsense of gender politics. Quoting Prue Goddard is, to my mind, all l need to see in an article to appreciate that their is an underlying gender politics agenda.
Posted by trade215, Monday, 1 August 2005 2:42:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is it my fault that some people clean too much? The world aint gonna stop if the house keeping is substantially reduced. In fact it may free up one's time to actually get involved and make a real difference. Shiney floors and fragrant, neatly pressed shirts just dont make the world go around.

If Prue has her way and there is an accounting of housework where it is priced and it becomes a normal practice to keep household ledgers and scorecards, there is going to be a huge shift out of the factories and offices into households. Guys like me, are never going to give up 'keeping' house (and the flexibility of working from home) because its a bit of a walk in the park compared to the alternative.
Posted by trade215, Monday, 1 August 2005 2:44:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Trade,
Ever wondered why women’s TV shows start about 10 am and finish about 3 pm.

Between 8 am (when the children go off to school) and 10 am (when the TV shows start), is when the housework is done.

When the children come home from school about 3 pm, the children’s programs begin, and between 3 pm and about 8 pm, the children watch TV, (which is termed child caring).

So if someone wants to learn about what the average person does, just ask a commercial TV executive. Better to ask them, then asking someone from the Sex Discrimination Commission.
Posted by Timkins, Monday, 1 August 2005 11:05:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Timkins,

dont know that l would classify daytime tv as generically 'womens tv' tho it is certainly the sort of tv that destroys braincells. Mind numbing, glib, cliched, gossipy, consumer muck. No way to spend any part of the day. l work from home and its very easy to get distracted, but l draw the line at watching crappy daytime tv. Its the cardinal sin of productivity in my book. It really epitomises why its called an idiot box.
Posted by trade215, Wednesday, 3 August 2005 8:04:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
My wife is aware of sex discrimination.I like her awareness.She has many demands about households that I try to meet up.But she does not want to discuss with me about sex discrimination seriously.She loves TV progammes of her choice those I do not like for a longer hours.But I do not want to disturb her.I have purchased a separate TV of my own.
I enjoy TV programme of my choice.We never like to travel alone.Above and all we love each other.She knows very well when I feel bored inspite of sex discrimination awareness.When you have good understanding it serves all purpose.
Posted by DR.PRABIR, Monday, 20 March 2006 4:54:45 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy