And stores were closed on Sundays...Maybe that was Utopia!

On Dec 6, 10:58 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> One possible resolution is to change our ideas on childcare.  I'm not
> sure the focus has to be so much in the home.  From the point of view
> of women and men wanting to have kids and look after them the system
> has lots of roadblocks - not least childcare and the times it is
> available (and cost).  The big snag with creating decent lifestyles is
> one needs radical change and it's no use waiting for socialist utopia
> or robot heaven - which would be chimera anyway.
> Most of my students with young kids found it hard to start lectures at
> 9 a.m. or attend in the evening or the afternoon after 3 p.m.  At the
> same time we had staff in the same position very good at slotting
> their timetables between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m.  The provision of
> childcare was always 'under review' rather than a reality.  The
> obvious answer is to get more flexibility and childcare in schools
> throughout the year.  This is a non-starter in 'business reality'.
>
> On 6 Dec, 13:06, rigs <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Which leads to over-compensation and a new prejudice often/sometimes.
> > My maternal history spanned biblicals but somehow I was able to be
> > mostly a stay-at-home mom which even the children were grateful for
> > and I hope to revive some of those skills with my grand-daughters as
> > change is on the way. I have truly missed family this last dozen
> > years. But I do see the additional stress on young women trying to
> > juggle all those "hats"- I even felt jealous of men dashing off to
> > their office when I had toddlers plus business on my mind.
>
> > On Dec 6, 4:24 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > My own feeling on the work side of equality is we have to do too much
> > > of it and that there is, in fact, plenty of time in a 40 year work
> > > span for ten years off to deal with early child carrying and nurture
> > > (or alternatives).  We are trying to establish equality in an already
> > > misunderstood and warped system.
>
> > > On 5 Dec, 00:39, rigs <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Actually, where I am going to is economics and job creation since
> > > > women are now equal in western countries and have embraced working
> > > > outside the home or must be a co-bread-winner due to the cost of
> > > > living. Plus all must compete with the machine and technology or
> > > > competitive foreign labor. There are dozens of side issues such as
> > > > longer life spans, over-population, impact of financial and government
> > > > mismanagement, etc.//I tend to view the two sexes as a reader/failed
> > > > writer- as types through history and am not very sentimental though
> > > > culture continues to send mixed messages even currently.//It's lovely
> > > > that you had such a positive experience with your own family despite
> > > > Tolstoy thinking happy families were all alike and possibly not
> > > > interesting to him as a writer. I think them fortunate although I
> > > > suppose there is a sense of quest and heroic attempts for those less
> > > > blessed that warms the soul.//Frankly, the Duchess is reminding me of
> > > > how ill I was with my first pregnancy with no tlc or hospital- finally
> > > > my mother-in-law had to take charge. Also another thing- my kind
> > > > neighbor laughing he was glad he wasn't a woman after his daughter-in
> > > > law's very difficult/dangerous labor (over 2 days) and delivery. Don't
> > > > worry- I bit my tongue.
>
> > > > On Dec 4, 4:11 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > My Mum and elder sister were pretty strong characters and it never
> > > > > really crossed my mind to treat anyone with other than the respect I
> > > > > felt for them.  I see where you re coming from rigs.  The repression
> > > > > is ongoing in some minds and reality around the world.  We are just
> > > > > changing our gender bias in 'heir to the throne rankings' so that
> > > > > female children get equal place.  Quite why we haven't worked out the
> > > > > real issue has nothing to do with gender and everything to do with
> > > > > throwing out the Royals I don't know.  If the gender-free inheritance
> > > > > rules had pertained 100 years before WW1 the British King in 1914
> > > > > would have been - er - Kaiser Wilhelm!
> > > > > There clearly are women's issues (men's, gays etc.) - and I doubt they
> > > > > can or should be exclusively derived 'within gender' or sub-classes -
> > > > > though this doesn't preclude groups talking the stuff through on such
> > > > > a basis.  I tend to think there has been progress, but I'm not sure
> > > > > how this has come about, if it has.
>
> > > > > On 4 Dec, 04:01, rigs <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Thanks.// I think your reaction can be traced back to the time when
> > > > > > men were considered the main/only source of security so women were
> > > > > > more likely to protect that; it really is more complicated, however.
> > > > > > Earlier homesteading and farming offered a different balance- a very
> > > > > > important role for the female that gave her a natural or necessary
> > > > > > equality. But younger couples are working on a balance, as I see 
> > > > > > it.//
> > > > > > Was going to bring Hesiod into the mix as he set out a horrid
> > > > > > description of females in the "Theogeny" (IX, 507-616), written in 8
> > > > > > B.C.. I vaguely remember the professor saying he probably was an 
> > > > > > ugly
> > > > > > farmer who was spurned by women so he took his revenge. But given 
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > date, it is close to the Eden story. Another work came to mind 
> > > > > > written
> > > > > > in the 1950's that I have poked around- "America As A Civilization" 
> > > > > > by
> > > > > > Max Lerner- particularly Chapter VIII/Section 6- "The Ordeal of the
> > > > > > American Woman" which captures some of what I was looking for in way
> > > > > > of explanation for my parent's generation. I think he captured it- 
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > a man. :-)
>
> > > > > > On Dec 3, 8:34 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Your new account is off moderation rigsy.  I've always been struck
> > > > > > > that women talking and acting for themselves are not reflected in 
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > literature and that some of the characters most dangerous to equal
> > > > > > > opportunity are female.
>
> > > > > > > On 2 Dec, 06:27, rigs <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Saturday, December 1, 2012 10:30:37 AM UTC-6, archytas wrote:
> > > > > > > > > The Body Class and Work Disability Discrimination Equality of 
> > > > > > > > > Opportunity Identity Politics Multiculturalism 
> > > > > > > > > Objectification Parenthood and Procreation Power Race Rape 
> > > > > > > > > Reproduction and the Family Science The Self Sex and Gender 
> > > > > > > > > Sex Markets Trans Issues These are just some of the topics I 
> > > > > > > > > thought I could put forward in teaching gender issues in 
> > > > > > > > > management. They underlie the bland politically correct 
> > > > > > > > > policy matters. One thing has always occurred to me as 
> > > > > > > > > missing in every debate I can remember. Women are as bad as 
> > > > > > > > > men as managers. I equate equality with hospitality (always 
> > > > > > > > > two-sided at least) and suspect we don't realise behaviour is 
> > > > > > > > > much less to do with gender or the individual than we think 
> > > > > > > > > and perhaps has little to do with rationality. I don't think 
> > > > > > > > > we see the wood for the trees on gender.
>
> > > > > > > > How unlike anything EVER mentioned to me as a girl or young 
> > > > > > > > woman. I suppose we depended on family tradition, religion and 
> > > > > > > > etiquette as we were groomed for marriage via mystery, 
> > > > > > > > motherhood and homemaking. Groomed, indeed!- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

-- 



Reply via email to