Whitty – which state has the VAWA? Changing the culture of violence against women is difficult task.

I am still not sure what your point was.

After the first year of care it is still maternity (parental) leave – as it is still leave to care for a child. As for the USA stats – in country where it takes three minimum wage jobs to pay rent, food and raise a child – I can see how easily it would be for 40% of women to earn more than men – they are statistically the ones with the three jobs rather than the two, (and taken on to cover the costs of children).

The same job for dollar figures are available through the ACTU and I believe that Stats has recently put some figures together. No – it is not because more women are working part time as the figures are based on full time work. Graduate full time employment salaries clearly show the picture as do the recent CEO salary stats.

I disagree with you that the effect of feminism has been to downgrade child raising. For example feminists have pushed for single parent pension, (previously widows pension), to allow women to raise their own children if that was there choice rather than being forced to work and earn money to have custody. This was the case until the 1960’s that if a woman wished to raise her own children she had to prove an income equal average weekly man’s earnings, (difficult when women only leagally able to earn a third of this) in custody disputes – as in the Australian novel and film “Caddy”. Many women of this time stayed in violent relationships for fear of losing their children

Re: discussion -Threatening to who?

It's not enough to say that the women who missed out could have chosen differently and therefore it's their own fault.

This is expecting women to choose irrationally. All their lives these women were told that autonomy was the highest value; it was drummed into them at school, on TV, in magazines and in films. If it's true that autonomy is the highest value, then they acted rationally and morally in deferring commitments to family life and to motherhood.

I suspect that what some people are really saying is that these women should have held to autonomy as the highest good as a public orthodoxy, but then pragmatically acted otherwise in terms of their own private lives.

But even this is problematic. It's not easy to insulate choices in your private life from what you accept as a public orthodoxy, particularly when feminists insisted so often that the personal is the political.

What feminists needed to do was to accept that marriage and children are vitally important to most women and that autonomy is therefore not always the sole organising principle of society.

'Whitty – which state has the VAWA?'

I don't know. Perhaps you can read the article yourself as you seem keen to comment on my comments of it.

'Changing the culture of violence against women is difficult task.'
Yes it is. But I don't think violence against men should be ignored. Or that it is necessary to erode the rights of men to the point they are guilty until proven innocent to change this supposed culture, if the article is accurate. Your attitude seems to be who cares, women should be protected at any price to men. This isn’t equality.

'I am still not sure what your point was. '
Maybe your comprehension skills are lacking then. Or you are just trying to wind me up. I'm not sure what your point is.

'I’m sure we can all find all kinds of quotes to back whatever we are saying'. I haven’t attempted to find quotes to back my opinion, all I have done is comment on an article James posted.

'After the first year of care it is still maternity (parental) leave'
Yes, but most government payments are considering the first year, and the justifications of only women getting it for breast feeding/birth reasons evaporate after a year.

I will generously take your word on the stats. God knows why considering your arrogant attitude. I cant see why it would make economic sense to pay men more than women if they were of the same value to a company.

'Many women of this time stayed in violent relationships for fear of losing their children'.
No doubt they did. As I am sure many men in this time stay in emotionally abusive, physically abusive, or loveless marriages for fear of losing access to their children and the home they live in. As I said before, women are protected at any price to men.

You can deny societal pressures and attitudes influence which parent goes to work and which stays home, but I don’t agree

Mark Richardson: "It's not enough to say that the women who missed out could have chosen differently and therefore it's their own fault."

"This is expecting women to choose irrationally."

Couldn't disagree more, and this is among the most paternal things I've ever heard.

Cutting through your language - autonomy has more meanings than you're expressing here.

My suspicion is, that you're referring to autonomy as a person living as a single unit, separated from marriage and the family unit.

Well, that's one interpretation. But before the individual adopts the lifestyle as wife and mother, autonomy has a different meaning.
That is, the freedom to choose what kind of life they want to lead.

In this instance, I think 'autonomy' is the only real option, and anything less is dictating to women how they should live their lives. It seems very ugly to me, and simply a dressed up version of the 1950s ethos that women should be house bound.

If a woman chooses marriage however, then after exercising their autonomy in choosing this, they are becoming part of a cooperative unit. The loss of autonomy cuts both ways, for men as well. It's a dual choice.

Thus, for all the rather patronising language in your last post, it comes back to the fact that its up to the women to choose that lifestyle.

You claim they're bombarded with the imagery associated with being an autonomous person without reliance upon a family unit.

To claim this is the overwhelming influence seems exceedingly shortsighted to me, given that our culture still has traditional aspects that places a premium on the family unit.
The image and message of the housewife mother, who is a skilled cook and devoted carer of children still permeates much of society, and I know women who have been left feeling inadequate because they can't cook a roast.

For all the perception that career is paramount, the opposite perception exists as well - the family priority.

So it's not an 'irrational' choice at all. It's just a choice that women are quite capable of making for themselves.

TRTL: ‘Mark Richardson: "It's not enough to say that the women who missed out could have chosen differently and therefore it's their own fault."
"This is expecting women to choose irrationally."
Couldn't disagree more, and this is among the most paternal things I've ever heard.’

Then follows one of the more nonsensical circular rants lately attempted on OLO. Not only does “TurnRightThenLeft“ unknowingly zigzag around Mark’s point, but is simultaneously and blissfully unaware that rather than just turning right then left, is actually traversing clockwise, then anti-clockwise.

TRTL would have us believe that men saying “we do not expect women to choose irrationally”, are being paternalistic, and feminists saying the same thing, are, well, feminists. No doubt, this is an important distinction. Moreover “So it's not an 'irrational' choice at all. It's just a choice that women are quite capable of making for themselves”. Hooah!

Actually seeker, I don't recall making any distinction between genders. You're making a gender distinction here that doesn't exist.

I'm just saying that denying women choice under the guise of looking after them is paternalistic and that once you strip away the condescending language, that's all Richardson's piece amounts to.

I never said I expect people to choose anything. There's a remarkably high number of dumb people in both genders. My point is that anyone should be free to make these dumb decisions, male or female, and if the silly woman in this article made those decisions it was her choice.

At the end of the day, I think blaming it on feminism is just plain weak. I'd be royally pissed off if people tried to deny me information simply because they didn't think I had the maturity to use it properly. I'm well aware that much of the information is flawed, but it's my choice to pick what's best for me and nobody elses.

That's paternalism and I don't give a damn what gender the proponent is.