Harman at it again.

[Gonzo]

FFS

I think that we are all missing a fundamental point on this issue.

At what point did the role of being a mother become far less important than having a career?

OK, so I come from a long middle-class line and when I came home from school my Mum was there to take care of feeding us and looking after us. I think that worked quite well. My mother gave up her career as a Nurse shortly before I was born to become a full time Mum and doesn't regret a minute of it. Now she is a full time Grandmother because my sister has to work and can't look after her children full time.

The biggest challenge to our lifestyle that I noticed was when I was in the middle-east and, to our eyes we would consider the women oppressed because they have to wear the black gowns and spend their time as full time mothers.

Now, who is really being oppressed - the women that can't work because they have to bring up their family full-time, or the women that can't bring up their family full-time because they have to work?

I blame the feminists. In fact, I blame Germaine Greer.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

From a cold hard risk to business perspective then there is more risk employing a fertile woman; men still cannot get pregnant (no that guy in the SUN is not really a man)

From a warm fuzzy and moral stand point then there should be equality.

To get these to meet, the chance of a man taking time off for pregnancy has to be the same as the chance of a woman taking time off for pregnancy, shared paternity leave seems to offer the best chance of this?

However we should understand that men and women ARE different, if they weren't we wouldnt be having this discussion. However "different" != "better"



/I shouldnt have got involved!

I tend to agree with this (apart from the non-ANSI operator) - as for the contention (made in some other posts) that people shouldn't get help form the rest of us to bring up kids - if I applied that logic I wouldn't be required to subsidise a variety of things for other people - it's just plain ridiculous.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

FFS

I think that we are all missing a fundamental point on this issue.

At what point did the role of being a mother become far less important than having a career?

OK, so I come from a long middle-class line and when I came home from school my Mum was there to take care of feeding us and looking after us. I think that worked quite well. My mother gave up her career as a Nurse shortly before I was born to become a full time Mum and doesn't regret a minute of it. Now she is a full time Grandmother because my sister has to work and can't look after her children full time.

The biggest challenge to our lifestyle that I noticed was when I was in the middle-east and, to our eyes we would consider the women oppressed because they have to wear the black gowns and spend their time as full time mothers.

Now, who is really being oppressed - the women that can't work because they have to bring up their family full-time, or the women that can't bring up their family full-time because they have to work?

I blame the feminists. In fact, I blame Germaine Greer.

Told you - Taliban.

[Gonzo]

Told you - Taliban.

No, I just don't think that bringing up children is a waste of an education.

Far from it.

EDIT

And to add a bit more, I certainly don't think that turning up at ClientCo every day and doing some stuff with their computer systems is ultimately more valuable to the human race than bringing up children.

[DodgyAgent]

FFS

I think that we are all missing a fundamental point on this issue.

At what point did the role of being a mother become far less important than having a career?

OK, so I come from a long middle-class line and when I came home from school my Mum was there to take care of feeding us and looking after us. I think that worked quite well. My mother gave up her career as a Nurse shortly before I was born to become a full time Mum and doesn't regret a minute of it. Now she is a full time Grandmother because my sister has to work and can't look after her children full time.

The biggest challenge to our lifestyle that I noticed was when I was in the middle-east and, to our eyes we would consider the women oppressed because they have to wear the black gowns and spend their time as full time mothers.

Now, who is really being oppressed - the women that can't work because they have to bring up their family full-time, or the women that can't bring up their family full-time because they have to work?

I blame the feminists. In fact, I blame Germaine Greer.

It is a matter of choice and women here have the choice. women also have responsibility for the day to day welfare of the families, responsibilities that not many men share if the wife wants to work. I believe that we have a duty to give women a bit of help through legislation and the benefits system to if anything free them from the captivity of men.

So I am all for helping women who want to have a family and work. What i object to is women like Harriet harman who jump on bandwagons to fulfill their own ambitions and take lagislation too far in order to promote their own agendas.

[Gonzo]

It is a matter of choice and women here have the choice. women also have responsibility for the day to day welfare of the families, responsibilities that not many men share if the wife wants to work. I believe that we have a duty to give women a bit of help through legislation and the benefits system to if anything free them from the captivity of men.

Fair enough, but this is my bug-bear. Why does our value system value working higher than bringing up children? I think that that is crazy.

This comes from someone that doesn't have any children of their own, and doesn't even like them that much.

Human Beings have become the most successful animals on the planet over the past 200,000 years. I rate that more highly than the past 40 years of tinkering.

[Cliphead]

Bye bye UK, Canada here I come

[Peoplesoft bloke]

It is a matter of choice and women here have the choice. women also have responsibility for the day to day welfare of the families, responsibilities that not many men share if the wife wants to work. I believe that we have a duty to give women a bit of help through legislation and the benefits system to if anything free them from the captivity of men.

So I am all for helping women who want to have a family and work. What i object to is women like Harriet harman who jump on bandwagons to fulfill their own ambitions and take lagislation too far in order to promote their own agendas.

Dodgy I agree 100% - just to be clear, I'm far from sure Harperson is right about this, but seeing some of the antediluvian views expressed here it would seem we have a way to go. As usual this many government thinks the answer is making another manky law, which it isn't.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

Bye bye UK, Canada here I come

Good luck with that - don't let the door bang behind you.

[Cliphead]

Good luck with that - don't let the door bang behind you.

I'll let someone else switch off the lights, had enough of this tulipehole.