“I believe that forcing women to look after the kids and home AND expecting them to do paid work is actually where the unfairness lies. I agree with Houellebecq when he says it's hard to argue with a traditional woman's role when the starting point is her breast-feeding her baby. My view - and I am conservative here - is that women are the natural nurturers and men are the physical pioneers. Let them come to their equality within these natural life parameters.”

Well said Rob, no I’m not going to stick around and fight the chicks off for you.

Anti:”As I said at the start of this discussion, this is nothing but a beatup designed to allow a few women's groups to put in a claim for funding, just like much of the sociological "research" around Feminist subjects. It is self-serving, incomplete, poorly organised, ideologically-based rubbish.”

But you say that every thread. Even I’m starting to believe it. And I just lost my train of thought and it had sounded good in my head… was about how any evil feminist group can want anything they like but that doesn’t mean they get any dosh without the government coming to the party so w’sup with the government cause it is mostly men isn’t it? Whistler says stuff about it all the time, male legislature etc.

Rehctub:”Well that's fine, as long as hubby doesn't claim his spouse allowance, or there are no tax benefits in doing so, otherwise, you are tech unemployed, as you are a drain on the national purse.
Stay home by all means, but please don't expect someone else to pick up the tab! Otherwise, you are simply 'unemployed'!”

Oh I’ve missed something, (stop rolling your eyes) – can I claim something being at home? What’s spouse allowance? Foster parents in NSW get a little letter from the Dir-Gen each year telling Centerlink we don’t have to look for work. Hubby does work so we get less FA for our foster kids through means testing – annoys me and strikes me as being penalized for working while fostering.

Some interesting responses.

Houellebecq - so my interpretation of the Australia Institute 'Impact of the Recession on Women' report is "simplistic", compared with yours that appears to be entirely based on your remarkably self-centred personal experience. You haven't actually read the report, have you?

As the report details, women are suffering on various levels from the current economic climate worse than men. Indeed, in terms of income the existing discrepancy has increased in recent years.

RobP: << My view - and I am conservative here - is that women are the natural nurturers and men are the physical pioneers. >>

You're not a conservative - you're a Neanderthal as far as contemporary gender relationships are concerned. Your post encapsulates perfectly why it is that feminism is still very relevant in contemporary society and why it is that women still aren't of equal status to men in Australia.

Antiwomen: << As I said at the start of this discussion, this is nothing but a beatup designed to allow a few women's groups to put in a claim for funding, just like much of the sociological "research" around Feminist subjects. >>

But you haven't read the actual report, have you? Here you go (and for the benefit of others who want to pontificate about it without having read it):

http://tinyurl.com/ljbell

<< It is self-serving, incomplete, poorly organised, ideologically-based rubbish. >>

I think that description is far more applicable to your posts on this subject than to the Australia Institute 'Impact of the Recession on Women' report.

"You're not a conservative - you're a Neanderthal as far as contemporary gender relationships are concerned."

CJ Morgan,

What do you call contemporary gender relationships exactly? Ones where the differences between men and women are zero? Because that's how things are trending. My point is that the differences between men and women will never go away and they shouldn't be made homogeneous. Sure things will progress and the way men and women react to each other will change, but the fundamental differences will always be there.

If you're saying feminism is really about getting a better deal for women, fair enough. If you're saying it's about making men and women the same, you're dead wrong.

Nice try CJ,

the report (which of course I haven't read) is irrelevant to my argument, as my argument is with YOU implying women don't make their own choices in a couple, and specifically that my partner didn't really choose to stay home.

I know my partner and my relationship much better than you. And that you assume you know better, and that you know how most couples work, shows you to be pretty simple minded.

'As the report details, women are suffering on various levels from the current economic climate worse than men. Indeed, in terms of income the existing discrepancy has increased in recent years.'

All of which I never disputed. My argument has been, as has antiseptics, that it is nonsense to talk about a discrepancy, when couples pool their resources. My partners loss is my loss and my gain is my partners gain, and vice versa. As I said, apart from super (if the couple breaks up), it doesn't matter.

Just how is my personal experience '*remarkably* self-centred', or is that a tautology, seeing that a *personal* experience would have to be self centred?

CJMorgan:"But you haven't actually read the report"

Nope, but I have now and it doesn't change my view as expressed earlier.

I quote:"Acknowledgements
Security4Women would like to acknowledge the assistance provided by
The WomenSpeak Alliance and The National Foundation for Australian
Women towards the production of this report."

As I said, it's nothing but a cash-for-report-of-choice self-promotional propaganda piece. Just the sort of thing you'd think was impressive, little fella. I guess you CAN fool some of the people all of the time.

Another gem: "The recession has not affected women’s unemployment as seriously as it has men’s"

Thanks for that link, little fella, there's lots of great stuff confirming what I've been saying all along. If only you'd read it before posting that link, eh, little fella?

Another beauty: "women’s longer life spans mean their financial needs tend to be higher than men’s in retirement."

Their financial "needs" tend to be higher than men's all their lives. Notwithstanding that, the report says that when hubby kicks the bucket, she gets the lot and has longer to spend it. Apparently that's a bad thing for her?

LOL, the more you read, the funnier it gets. Pure comedy gold.

Houellebecq: << ...my argument is with YOU implying women don't make their own choices in a couple... >>

No, my implication is that women's choices are constrained by parameters that seem to be shared by them as a gender - at least according to reputable research. Of course, there are all kinds of ways that individuals reach their own accommodations within those parameters, and many are very successful. However, when the sh!t hits the fan it's the women who predominantly end up disadvantaged. There are many published studies that support that fact.

<< Just how is my personal experience '*remarkably* self-centred', or is that a tautology, seeing that a *personal* experience would have to be self centred? >>

While personal experience is an unavoidable and often valuable basis for the formulation of generalised opinions about others, a wise person locates their own limited experience of humanity within a wider corpus of human knowledge about how people behave. To assert that you and your partner are somehow unique among the middle-class Gen-X masses is just a tad arrogant, not to mention dumb.

I expect that you'll work it out eventually, though.

Antiwomen: << Pure comedy gold. >>

What's "pure comedy gold" is that you said this:

<< As I said at the start of this discussion, this is nothing but a beatup designed to allow a few women's groups to put in a claim for funding, just like much of the sociological "research" around Feminist subjects. It is self-serving, incomplete, poorly organised, ideologically-based rubbish. >>

without having actually read the report.

Such blatant intellectual dishonesty is unsurprising, but it's good to see you own up to it for a change.