| >I keep hearing this argument from people. Just what is equality, and how much
The most common point of confusion is to mistake equivalence for equality.
Thus, while men and women are clearly not equivalent in biological matters
they may be granted equality of opportunity in the labour market.
I have avoided 733 because most of the argument there is puerile and devoid
of substantial intellect. Pregnancy reveals a massive biological inequality
between the sexes that has far more impact on women's lives and well-being
than on men's. Notions of political or social equality, which may be valid
in their space, cannot change this reality and and argument which ignores
this is fatally flawed from its inception.
|
| In France, in all professional sectors except hospital it was forbidden
for the women to work during the night. Only the men could.
Now with EUROPE we have to replace the national laws by the EEC
laws. The EEC law in that domain is that, as all the men , the women
have now the "privileges" to work during the nights.
No reaction from the feminism associations.
The women will retire also at the same age as the men, not sooner.
This is equality.
THIERRY
|
| From 733.239:
.228> accidentally conceived children against the wishes of the father
.228> should, *if possible*, raise the child without his help. This is the
If the woman has the power to completely disown the pregnancy,
then you must also make that option avaliable to the man. Anything
less is not equality.
I keep hearing this argument from people. Just what is equality, and how much
of it can we reasonably insist upon?
In the case of racial descrimination, I think that absolute equality can be
acheived (or at least imagined), though it may take a very long time (my pre-
requisites here is the essential elimination of detectable racial prejudice in
society--people born, raised and living under this stigma do not compete from
on equal footing with those who are not, though they might acheive great things
despite the disadvantage).
But can absolute parity ever be acheived between men and women? Especially in
regard to reproductive choice (as is being discussed in the excerpt above)?
One problem is that, in the case of racial descrimination, all that is really
being sought is equal treatment. Things like Affirmative Action are still in
place because in the current social climate, equal consideration in hiring still
cannot reliably be obtained. (Recent government studies have shown that
if you send equally qualified, equally presentable, black and white applicants
to the same interviews, the white applicant will get more than the lion's share
of offers. I'm sure the Bush administration was hoping these studies would turn
out differently 8^). If not actual racial prejudice, if all things are equal,
people will have a tendency to want to hire others who are like them.
But women are boldly going beyond a demand to be treated "the same". They ask
to be given concessions that help make it easier for them to be in the workplace
(guaranteed pregnancy leave, daycare benefits, more reproductive choice than
men, etc.). Is this, indeed, fair?
I would argue that women must have these things to obtain equivalent results
from life. Without these concessions, it becomes much more difficult for a
woman to have a career and a family than it is for a man. Forcing her to make
a choice between success in business and having children is the real
"inequality".
What do you think?
-- Mike
|
| In any reasonable relationship it is not *her* that has to make the
choice; it is the couple that has to make the choice.
When we had our first child the decision was not easy. My wife
could have continued her job as a teacher, and at the time she was
earning about 10% more than I was. We decided that my job had probably
more prospects than hers, probably justified since as consultant 2 I
earn more than the head of a large school.
Also, with the increase in home working there is not neccessarily a
choice to be made. Even quite some years ago, the project leader in the
development of the IAS operating system (some of you may remember it)
only took about 24 hours off work for the birth of her baby. There are
some days I don't bother to go into the office (2 miles away), and when
I do the main reason is often that I don't have a Postscript printer at
home.
I admit it is different for jobs like lorry driving, house
construction or shop assistant - you really have to be fit
and present, but then jobs of that sort don't often offer a lot of
career progression. Most jobs with good career prospects you can miss
out at least one of those qualifications.
I also acknowlege that it is not *quite* that simple, and breast
feeding for 20 minutes every two hours is not compatible with a teaching
timetable (one of the reasons for our decision),
but most professional jobs would permit you to take a few minutes
coffee break/"milk break" when you thought it was neccessary.
|