Where are all the women in the cabinet?

Re the experience arguement, with MPs, we're actively looking for people with all kinds of experience. Being an MP is still more often than not a 2nd career. Given that if anyone says being a parent isn't experience, they don't really have a leg to stand on.

"both parents can and should take equal responsibility."

True, but we are a long long way off from a culture where both men and women can work part time in every single industry in order for one of them to take over half the child-rearing (we're talking about in a 100 years or so here). And what about all the single mothers who don't have or don't want the father near their children. What about them? Who is going to take half the responsibility off them?

Then you have that old chestnut about women who took time off not having the experience as a man who didn't take time off for pregnancy and child-rearing.
So the whole culture has to change.

Sakura, for very young babies I can see what you're saying but surely for school age children both parents can and should take equal responsibility.

Also I think women need to be sold the pros of being an MP more. No one ever says, well you get the long summer recess which is good for spending time with the kids over their summer holidays, I tend not to turn up at Westminister to vote unless it's a three line whip and I converted the front room of my constituency home to be my constituency office to reduce my commute. If women saw it that way (and many men already do) I'm sure they'd be a lot more tempted.

that women have

Yes, I think you're right about the fact that more women should try to enter politics. There's no reason why more middle-aged women whose children are older can't enter and try to get things moving in there, make the culture more feminized.

Yes, men don't have the child-care responsiblities that men have, and never will. They don't get pregnant, they don't have time off with their newborns while they breastfeed. They are more likely to abandon a family home than the mother is. Men don't have as many responsibilities by far. And they take advantage of that by having created a culture in politics that far more is suitable for someone without those responsibilities.
That's the real reason why women are underrepresented in politics.

It should be parents childcare responsibilities. Seems that being a politician doesn't put an unacceptable strain on men's childcare responsibilities. (Or maybe they don't have as much responsibility for their children.)

Oh no Sakura, I'm not saying that it's not to do with working culture. One of the issues that my company found was that the perception was very different from the reality.

For example, the high paid area had some long hours but it wasn't consistent and there was no travel time as all the work was London based. The low pay department had relatively easy hours but involved frequent travel out of London so the reality was just as much time was spent at work or getting to work.

Also explaining the long term pay to women made them think about their options. Women do value money when the difference is spelt out to them.

Women were also concerned about working in a male dominated environment so it became self fufilling.

I was one of the women who went to work in the previously male dominated department. I wouldn't say it was easy but it wasn't as much of a struggle as I thought it might be. There is still discrimination but it is changing more women enter the area.

happysmiley, you don't think its got anything to do with the working culture in politics? You don'T think that being in government puts any strain on women's child-care responsibilities?

WOmen have child-bearing responsibiltes that men don't have. They get pregnant. They don'T have a wife.
If you want to go into politics you practically have to be married to the job.

THat masculine work culture has to change.

"I agree with the best person for the job" so do I. Only the "best person" never seems to be standing.

So is it just a coincidence that just as women don't seem to choose to become MPs and run as party leader, many also choose not to become CEOs and captains of industry?

Either this is because they don't fancy power and equality or it is because the deck is stacked against them in a male dominated patriarchal society with a status quo that is so established people don't often think to question it.

A country where 50% of the population are black but the vast majority of those in positions of power and influence were white, would be seen as a very unequal society. Anybody arguing that 'black people just don't choose equality of representation' would be seen as hopelessly deluded. It is just the same when it is about sex.

I think it's interesting to look at why men are much more likely to put themselves forward for a position than women. I think we need to understand this so that we can encourage good women to also put themselves forward.

One example I have was from when I graduated. On my graduate scheme everyone with a place was asked to choose which department they wanted to join. Starting salaries for all departments were the same. But long term one department offered much better opportunities and pay than others. One was much worse. Men always chose the one with the best long term opportunities, women the one with the worst. The ones in the middle went 50:50.

The company wanted to change this and make all departments 50:50. Their very simple solution was to simply say to the female grads, we'd really like you to join department X because we have a shortage of women there. If anyone asked for more information, reasons why, work life balance, travel, difficulties of working in a male dominated environment etc they were given an honest answer. The ratios immediately leap to 50:50. The following year, same strategy was employed and again they had the 50:50 ratio they wanted. Then they got complacent and it went straight back to the way it always was.

Obviously, it was a really easy solution and it encouraged more women to take the more financially rewarding routes so helped with the pay gap.

I do wonder why people continue to say women just don't want to do it when it's so easy to convince them that they do.

Mint, the crux of the matter for me is WHY more men than women choose to enter politics in the first place

It's not a free choice for all, with all things being equal. It just isn't. and it's not the same in other European countries either - I wish I had more time right now to read about the aetiology of it all

And happysmiley is quite right about the status quo, the current situation isn't doing much to challenge it.

I agree with the best person for the job but it depends on your view point. Different perspectives are needed and that can not come from the same type of schooling, the same sex and the same world view it need a mix- up. I hope Labour work very hard in the coming years to get back into power.
I miss them already.

By the way, I don't think it's about representation. I think a man is equally well able to represent me. But I would like to see the best person for a job get it and think it's strange that there are five times as many good men out there.

But Mint, what if pro Mormon policies were the status quo? A Mormon goverment wouldn't have to push pro Mormon policies as they are already in place.

Think about the pay gap. Men get paid more for the same jobs. A male goverment doesn't have to push for a policy where men are paid more than women, men already are paid more, it's the status quo. A government that wishes to see equality would actively have to press for a pro women policy (maybe pay audits).

That's great, Minthumbug.
But for me, prostitution, the white slave trade, decent financial backing for mothers, no war, shutting down shops that sell goods prematurely sexualizing children, rape convictions, one mother one midwife, would be right at the very top of the list if I ran.

"the idea that men should be the default choice to represent everyone is even more odd"

Too true. IT's as bizzare as having, say, 80% Mormons in there. Why should Mormons be over-represented at the expense of Christians or Muslims non-believers... Well, they shouldn't be

And to turn your last point on its head - the idea that men should be the default choice to represent everyone is even more odd

Sorry minthumbug, I am not meaning to single you out and lecture you I have work to do anyway but I can't stop picking this scab

• I couldn't give a hoot about maternity leave. I am far more worried about the economy and civil liberties.

The government doesn't give a hoot what you care about, because you're not being represented there.

minthumbug, I want women to represent the views of women AND MEN

Nobody is saying - we need to get women in power to represent women properly

That's obviously bolleaux

I am saying that women represent over 50% of the population and therefore that should be reflected better in ALL walks of life

yy Sakura