Anti: “Ms Cassells, a research fellow, said young women had benefited from the feminist movement. There were 80,000 more women than men studying for bachelor degrees in university, and more women than ever were employed in highly skilled jobs such as managers and administrators."”

DoCS would be one of the most highly female populated departments in Australia? They have failed time and time again these managers and administrators in skirts. While being great at university, paperwork and butt covering they forgot to be females/mothers.

What good are they as women in managment if they forgot to be female in their pursuit of equality?

Yabby - there you go again. You're implying that my spouse and son are gay because they don't need a maid service. See, I knew you didn't know anything about feminism; equality or anything in that ballpark. You can't get past the notion that boys must be macho and girls must be dependant. In my book; there is nothing wimpy about being able to take care of yourself.

Btw we have daughters too :)

Antiseptic: while they have only gained parity; which is fine. Still fewer obtain higher degrees (as I said) or advance into upper academia or into any decision making positions. I suppose it will come in time.

Jeweley: Do you think it would be better if the decisions were all made by men? What do you mean "forgot to be female" ? Can you elaborate a bit on what you're seeing so that I can get the picture.
Ta.

Hi Pynchme, Yeah that was a little bit out there. This is what I have experienced that initiated that little outburst:

I have had caseworkers in my house in tears and some just tearing up as they agree with me about which kids have been ill treated while in care by decisions made by management. Decisions where the caseworkers have not been heard and I know I never got heard voicing the same complaints.

Okay so those caseworkers were female and showing the emotion I would expect from anyone who cared about the individual children and been left powerless to help them.

All their managers are female and some of them have also been in my house. Double talk, neither confiming nor denying but not one hint of any form of nurturing or concern towards small children. I did get the odd dismissing wave of a hand. They do their political stuff well and look at me like I am alien because I don’t see “management” problems I see children damaged.

So their job in this one business is to do right by the children. They fail and don’t care as long as politically their butts are well covered.

Yes I want the men back, I think they would do a better job defending the children. The women in DoCS are bullied by the NGO’s… this is what caused some of the children I know being damaged. I don’t think if DoCS had men running it they would tolerate any bullying.

So to start with I thought women should be doing this job until I realised they forgot how a “mother” will fight for her young. Men might do this job well for other reasons. Women have failed because they forgot they were in fact women.

Btw Yabby, It only just occurred to me that you might have jumped in without seeing the source of the comment.

I'm glad that you could see what a stupid comment that was; because it wasn't mine. I was responding to a link posted by Antiseptic, where a theorist goes on about males exercising basic hunting instincts or some such then continues "...Gurian even posits that the male brain actually can't "see" dust or laundry piling up as the female brain often can...".

Jeweley: What I have noticed is that some women get into whatever positions they can; and they buy into the prevailing system. I am the sort who seeks to change it, and it disappoints me when women just conform to the systems that have done/do so much harm. Having said that; the systems remain, and I have concerns about a LOT of bureaucrats - male or female. It might be that it takes a certain type of callousness to get such positions and make the decisions that they do. I don't know.

Btw: One problem I have with your post; though I think I can recognize what you're saying, is the idea that women were always of a certain type or softness or naural nurturers. Maybe most are (maybe; or at least a good number) but surely not all. That isn't a modern thing; I think there have always been people who were something other than the stereotype. Sometimes the different type is good; sometimes it's not.

Pynchme, do you think that, if we take away the gender, people who are particularly callous naturally gravitate to positions in management? Putting it in the frame of child protection makes it worse.

My biggest problem with my post is I really did believe in women and have recently had it shattered.

I have no idea how to seek to change anything but after witnessing what I have I could really do with some suggestions. I just wanted to stay home, mind my own business and look after kids; I am probably the most boring female on earth.

Women stopping women caring, men nowhere to be seen in all of this.

Ironic this conversation being in this thread.

Pynchme, I think you are spot on about the type of person it takes to get into some roles. Not just the selection criteria but the measures which are used to reward them and those they report to all seem to contribute to thinking which misses the goals which they should be aiming at. Possibly because the other stuff is harder to measure.

At the same time the role itself will change people and the way they express themselves. The conflicting pressures of jobs would harden some and break others if they do get to the position whilst maintaining a high level of concern. DOC's and the like don't operate outside society, their staff still have families they may be providing for, they still have to find ways of coping with the pressures that they face in the job and what may be conflicting priorities.

I'd hate to going home from my day at work knowing that a child is at risk of abuse because I could not find a way to make them safe. My guess is that DOC's staff face that regularly and that they will all find different way's of dealing with it.

R0bert