Er, whatever, GlenWriter.

I'm sorry but I fail to see how parents constantly shagging would be in any way linked to their ability to encourage their children to fulfil their dreams

GlenW,
So, soft porn should be shown on TV as it is a good role model for young kids (as long as the message is ‘its what all loving couples do’)? Really? Quite amazing. And should it only show the missionary position? Or should the ‘diveristy’ of love also be shown?

And how is a woman working not ‘supporting the husband’? If a woman supports her husband by staying home and keeping house, isn’t this the same as a husband doing the same? Or is it more dependant on whether there are dangly bits between the legs as deserving of more support than not?

Nothing you have written is based in any more than old age, religious dogmatic claptrap. Try presenting a logical argument based on the concepts of equality and responsibility. Or is your equality more Orwellian than you reveal?

Ohhhhhh, give me strength Oh Lord!

Neither Laurie nor Reason can accept the existence of masculinity. For both, gender difference is limited to the genitalia one happens to be born with.

I'm not sure how, on this basis, Laurie or Reason can explain the normal workings of heterosexuality. Why would men fall in love with women and choose to marry them, if the only difference between men and women are the organs between their legs?

Men obviously perceive something different about women, something admirably feminine, which orients them to women both emotionally and sexually.

I wonder too how Laurie and Reason reconcile their belief that gender difference is limited to genitalia with modern science. What about testosterone? What about the differences between men and women in the structure of the brain? Are we to ignore the scientific evidence in order to uphold a politically correct theory?

Laurie, whether you like it or not, we are influenced by gender and this means that women will never be the main provider in a significant number of families. In Australia today, even after decades of feminism, 50% of women with young children are home full-time and another 33% are home part-time.

Kim Beazley made a speech today in which he endorsed this pattern of family life. He said "A lot of women believe that the best thing for children is if they can be at home in the early years. Fair enough too. A good society is one which makes sure they can."

Laurie, we are a long way from a widespread role reversal within the family.

Mark:
So Kim Beazley said "A lot of women believe that the best thing for children is if they can be at home in the early years. Fair enough too. A good society is one which makes sure they can."
Kim Beazley must be John Howard's press secretary. Every time Kim opens his mouth he salutes the way John Howard rules the country.

Mark, you misunderstand me.

I am not looking for role reversal, with all men staying home with the kiddies while all women become the breadwinner. I'm looking for a situation where each family makes the decisions based on their own circumstances as to what suits them.

You say most women with young children stay home - so what? If this is their CHOICE, more power to them. If they are doing so because their partners insist that it is a "woman's place", then THAT is wrong.

I do not deny the existance of masculinity or femininity. I am quite a feminine girl, lots of skirts and high heels. But that dosn't mean that I should be EXPECTED to stay home and keep house when I have children. I may do so, but I suspect I'd be rather terrible at it, having no taste for cleaning and little skill for cooking.

I don't deny that many women wish to stay home with small children. Probably many men do also - if the current debarcles around child custody arrangements tells us anything, it is that men also wish to spend a great deal of time with their children. Why should they be denied by their "masculinity" from spending time with the kiddies, looking after babies etc?

I only seek to break down the EXPECTATIONS which people associate with male or female. So that women can stay home or go out to work. So that men can stay home or go out to work. Not one for one and one for the other. But what works for the couple.