• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Myth & Reality on Job Equality for Women

Newsweek Article

Came across this article today and found the results of this study rather interesting. Despite the more generous and lenient options available to mothers in the European workforce, American women are more likely to achieve respected or what is otherwise considered positions of power and prestige in business.

This pretty much validates or otherwise supports a contention I have had for some time...that there are distinct gender roles, and that men and women can never be truly equal, particularly in the workforce. This dynamic centers largely around the decision to have children.

I don't agree that women should be subservient to men in a relationship, but this does not mean that the traditional model of male bread winner and female homemaker is a bad one. Granted, some scenarios require that both spouses work, but then again, the cost of living in America has skyrocketed due largely to our materialistic excess. Our grandparents and even parents didnt have to worry about the added costs of cable television, big screen plasma TVs, computers, and all the other gadgets that didnt exist 30 or 40 years ago.

Women cannot expect to have a power career AND have children. The feminist movement of the 1970s seemed to downgrade or otherwise condemn the homemaker role, yet an increasing number of 20 something women are choosing that path for themselves. Perhaps because their mothers were largely absent from the child raising process in their pursuit of "equality."

Let's face it...there is a biological difference between men and women, not to mention that our psychological wiring is completely different. There can never be true equality between the sexes. I also think it is somewhat hypocritical of the feminist ideal for equality while expecting exceptions for women, particularly with regards to having children AND maintaining their careers.

To be fair, men have certainly benefitted from some of these initiatives, and fathers SHOULD have an equal role in the raising of their children. It takes two to maintain a household, but even in that arrangement, their are distinct roles.
 
Feminism = death of the western civilization, because feminism = no children.

The concept of a family is disintegrating in the U.S., and we must save it, lest we be buried under a human carpet of the third world. As long as they reproduce 3X as fast as we are, it doesn't matter how fast our society evolves, we'll still be on the losing side.

Feminists seem to have a lot of trouble telling EQUALITY from EQUIVALENCE. Men and women are not the same, and I think we're mature enough of a society to admit it, and use it to our advantage, rather then for discrimination.

To be equally important, people don't necessarily have to do the same things. Sure, for the argument of simple human equality, everyone should be given the same options... but we shouldn't encourage people to continue behaving in a way that will lead to our extinction.
 
Originally posted by: Meuge
Feminism = death of the western civilization, because feminism = no children.

The concept of a family is disintegrating in the U.S., and we must save it, lest we be buried under a human carpet of the third world. As long as they reproduce 3X as fast as we are, it doesn't matter how fast our society evolves, we'll still be on the losing side.

Feminists seem to have a lot of trouble telling EQUALITY from EQUIVALENCE. Men and women are not the same, and I think we're mature enough of a society to admit it, and use it to our advantage, rather then for discrimination.

To be equally important, people don't necessarily have to do the same things. Sure, for the argument of simple human equality, everyone should be given the same options... but we shouldn't encourage people to continue behaving in a way that will lead to our extinction.
I'm fine with women choosing careers over children; there are plenty of rich successful men who make little or no pretense of having an interest in family. For the women who feel the same way, that's fine.

Most women do not feel that way, and after the decline in motherhood associated with the initial feminist movement, we're seeing a couple of trends to counteract that. Husbands are becoming more involved in the day to day care of their children; for example, even in the early 80s, my Dad changed his work schedule (because he was already in management) to be home at the end of the school day with my brother and I.

Increased affuence for professionals and dual-income families have also allowed more families to fill in gaps in parenting time with child-care solutions; these can be over-used IMO, but they are a great tool to let families 'have it both ways', and while expensive, are no longer simply the domain of the wealthy. They also have proven benefits due to early socialization experiences for children.
 
Wasnt US like 60th in the ranking for women in high government positions in the world? Doesnt have much to do with this, but just wondering...
 
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Increased affuence for professionals and dual-income families have also allowed more families to fill in gaps in parenting time with child-care solutions; these can be over-used IMO, but they are a great tool to let families 'have it both ways', and while expensive, are no longer simply the domain of the wealthy. They also have proven benefits due to early socialization experiences for children.
Daycare is not only NOT a solution, it's also a very dangerous, and often destructive concept.

Contemporary American culture has driven a wedge between the generations... but it's at the generational junctions that family cohesiveness resides. Children shouldn't be in daycare... or with a babysitter... they should be with their grandparents.

If you look at the cultures that are now producing the most successful offspring under comparable economic conditions here in the U.S., they are cultures where children and their parents stay tightly knit throughout their lives.
 
I've noticed that having grandparents in the picture improves the quality of parenting. It does this by both providing more time for the kids and by teaching new parents parenting skills. But is greater grandparent involvement a feasible solution? The US is such a mobile society that a huge percentage of children do not reside close to their grandparents and hence cannot be easily visited by their grandparents. Also, I come from what used to be a third world country myself and let me tell you - do not over estimate the role that grandparents used to play in the past in the lives of their grand kids. Grandparents were very often not part of the picture of child rearing because grandparents were often dead from natural causes before their grand kids were even born.
 
do not over estimate the role that grandparents used to play in the past in the lives of their grand kids. Grandparents were very often not part of the picture of child rearing because grandparents were often dead from natural causes before their grand kids were even born.
I can think of scenarios, my own family included, where close proximity to grandparents is not always a good thing...especially for Old World cultures, the intrusive in-laws is a dynamic that has destroyed many a marriage.

Extended family certainly plays a role in the upbringing of children, but there is a fine line between leveraging that relationship without it becoming counter-productive to the health of the family unit.
 
Back
Top